![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This paper is focused on the political rhetoric hidden in the English translation by Timothy Richard of the Awakening of Faith (Dasheng qixin lun 大乘起信論), one of the most popular Buddhist texts in East Asia. It first treats Richard’s translation as an important event in the intellectual history by placing it back to the distinctly different veins of Buddhist studies respectively in China and in the West since the nineteenth century. It then explores Richard’s creative interpretations for the two key Buddhist concepts of Mahāyāna and Hinayana as well as his hidden writing strategies while translating and interpreting Buddhist texts. Finally, this paper analyzes in detail the ‘Western “matching-meaning”’ (yang geyi 洋格義) as expressed in the translation of the Awakening of Faith, bringing to light Richard’s Christian reconstruction of Buddhist scriptures over the course of translation.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. The process that the Awakening of Faith underwent from being questioned to canonization in the history of Chinese Buddhism, beginning with Fazang’s 法藏 (643－712) Tang dynasty commentary on Awakening of Faith, made this text one of the most important texts in the development of Chinese and East Asian Buddhism. In this regard, please refer to Chapter 4 of Lai’s ‘The Awakening of Faith’.
2. With regard to the nationalist rhetoric that fills Daisetsu Suzuki’s writings on Zen, a point which has been analysed at length by Western scholars, please refer to the author’s article ‘Ou-Mei chanxue de xiezuo 歐美禪學的寫作’. Although the Awakening of Faith has been the subject of ongoing scrutiny by scholars of Buddhism, Suzuki nevertheless insisted on, and did not hesitate to spend a great deal of ink defending, East Asian Buddhism being represented by the Awakening of Faith, a point of view which encompasses an important political discourse. See Lusthaus, ‘Huigui yuantou 回歸源頭’.
3. Faure, Chan Insights and Oversights, 53.
4. Richard, Higher Buddhism, 47. In regards to Richard’s critique of Suzuki, see the article listed below.
5. Ibid., 38–40.
6. Hakeda, Awakening of Faith, 17.
7. Actually, among some non-specialists in Buddhist studies, Timothy Richard’s English translation, has been relatively well appreciated and discussed from the perspective of comparative religious studies. For example, in recent years, Dr Lee Chi-ho 李智浩 of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, has studied Richard’s thought from the angle of Buddhist and Christian dialogue, including research on Richard’s translation of the Awakening of Faith. For this please see Chi-ho Lee 李智浩 and Yuen-tai So 蘇遠泰, ‘Hua di wei you 化敵為友)’; Chi-ho Lee 李智浩, ‘Zhongguo Ye Fo duihua de zaisi 中國耶佛對話的再思’; ‘ ‘Dasheng qixin lun’ de quanshi《大乘起信論》的詮釋’. Dr Lee’s discussion of Richard and his translation of the Awakening of Faith stresses the point that it is ‘a Christian interpretation drawn from Buddhism’ (yuan fo ru ye de quanshi 援佛入耶的诠释), and carries out an analysis of several philosophical concepts in Richard’s translation of the Awakening of Faith, which may provide the reader with some important insights. However, this research still has many layers yet to be developed, and discussion on this topic should move forward.
8. Tymoczko, ‘In What Sense Is a Translator in Between?’, 184.
9. Said, Dongfang xue 東方學, 15.
10. Based on the social construction theory of ‘habitus’ [which the author translates as xisu 習俗 meaning something like ‘custom’ –TN] from the cultural sociology of the famous French scholar Pierre Bourdieu, Jean-Marc Gouanvic presents a so-called social construction theory for translation, and thinks that, for interpreting translations, we must at the same time consider the procedure for producing knowledge as well as the historical conditions and the ‘place’ [the author uses the word changyu 場域, which, while normally meaning something like ‘place’ or ‘area’, is the translation used in Chinese for Bordieu’s concept of ‘field’ –TN] that produced the translation. See his essay, ‘A Model of Structuralist Constructivism in Translation Studies’.
11. Gernet, Zhongguo yu Jidu jiao 中國與基督教.
12. John K. Fairbank, ‘Protestant Writings’, 2.
13. Glüer, ‘The Encounter’.
14. Edkins, A Volume of Sketches, 1; 360.
15. Glüer, ‘The Encounter’.
16. Soothill, Timothy Richard of China, 292–95.
17. Richard, Qinli Wan Qing Sishiwu Nian 親歷晚清四十五年, 136, 320. In a related pamphlet entitled ‘Wanted, Good Samaritans for China’, Richard once wrote that each new missionary should study local religion as a means for evangelizing, and that this was both basic and necessary, and could expand the effects of missionary work. See Ibid., 178. [This is a translation of Timothy Richard, Forty-Five Years in China: Reminiscences (London: Fisher Unwin, 1916). The passage about this pamphlet is on p. 199: “Firstly, that it was essential that each new missionary, in addition to learning the language, should be required to study the native religions and Mission methods, and thereby multiply his efficiency”. –TN] In addition, he himself proclaimed that the majority of his time in China was spent studying Buddhism. See his work Higher Buddhism, 1.
18. Glüer, ‘The Encounter’.
19. Soothill, Timothy Richard of China, 311–12.
20. With regard to this point, Paul Tillich’s work is very insightful. He analysed the implicit narrative that formed the background of the idea of universalism within the Christian tradition. He pointed out that in the early Christian tradition, the judgement of other religions was made based on the concept of logos. That is, logos was thought to be pervasive throughout the religions of all ethnic groups, and this universal existence is precisely preparation for the appearance of the most important figure in the history of logos–Jesus Christ. Consequentially, at the same time they were tolerant of all non-Christian religions, they also saw these religions as preliminary preparations leading to Christianity, whereby Christianity was seen as the most perfect embodiment of logos. Tillich, ‘Christian Principles’, 34–35.
21. Edkins, in his work A Volume of Sketches, makes many criticisms of Buddhism, and in the final stroke of the book, gives the following appraisal of Buddhism: that in its teaching of ethics ‘the efforts of Buddhism cannot for a moment be compared with Christianity’s contribution to humanity’; see A Volume of Sketches, 420.
22. One of Richard’s colleagues wrote with regard to Richard’s motivation for researching Buddhism, that it was none other than to show that Christianity was superior to Buddhism. Beyond that, in an 1897 letter sent to his wife, Richard criticized several shortcomings of Buddhism, pointing out that Christianity’s understanding of heaven was correct, and that in this regard was better than the methods of Buddhism. See Soothill, Timothy Richard of China, 313–14.
23. See Thelle, ‘Chuanjiaoshi de Zhuanbian 傳教士的轉變’, 123–24. See also Glüer, ‘The Encounter’.
24. Glüer, ‘The Encounter’.
25. Edkins, A Volume of Sketches, viii.
26. Welch, Buddhist Revival, 224; 344.
27. See Yang, ‘Qixinlun zhenwang 《起信論》真妄’, 390.
28. See Richard, Qinli Wan Qing Sishiwu Nian 親歷晚清四十五年, 174. See also Higher Buddhism, 44–45.
29. Shen Pengling 沈彭齡, ‘Yang Renshan xiansheng nianpu 楊仁山先生年譜’, in Yang Renshan quanji 楊仁山全集, 597.
30. Yang’s Buddhist standpoint can be summarized by the phrase ‘Look up to Xianshou for the teachings, but Amitābha is the practice’ (Jiao zun xianshou, xing zai mituo 教尊賢首，行在彌陀), a point of view that is completely in line with traditional Chinese Buddhist teachings. (Xianshou 賢首 is a reference to Fazang 法藏 (643–712), Tang dynasty Buddhist philosopher and third ‘patriarch’ of the Huayan 華厳 tradition. [Amitābha (ch. mituo 彌陀, abbreviation of emituofo 阿彌陀佛) is the name of a Buddha who resides in the ‘Western pure land’ (ch. xifang jingtu 西方淨土), the main figure in the ‘Pure Land’ strand of Buddhist doctrine that emphasizes reciting the name of this Buddha in order to attain rebirth in this ‘pure land’ (rather than this ‘impure’ land) after death. –TN] Shen Cengzhi 沈曾植 in his ‘Yang jushi taming’ 楊居士塔銘 (Inscription for Layman Yang [Wenhui]’s Cenotaph) explains Yang’s Buddhological standpoint: ‘In study he takes [the works of] Aśvaghoṣa (ch. maming 馬鳴) to be essential in principle, he takes as Fazang 法藏 the vow to practice, and takes Xianshou 賢首 and Lianchi 蓮池 as his original teacher; the nature [of things] and their appearance are complete and integrated, Ch’an [i.e. Zen] and Pure Land completely evince [enlightenment]’. (其學以馬鳴為理宗，以法藏為行願，以賢首、蓮池為本師，性相圓融，禪淨徹證)” (Yang Renshan quanji 楊仁山全集, 573.; [This passage mentions both Fazang 法藏 and Xianshou 賢首 separately, and seems to be referring to two different figures. The latter Xianshou clearly refers to the same Xianshou as above; that is, the Tang dynasty scholar-monk also known as Fazang. The former Fazang seems to be a reference to Fazang Pusa 法藏菩薩 (Dharmâkara Bodhisattva), a bodhisattva-monk mentioned in the Wuliangshou jing 無量壽經 (aka the “Sutra of Immeasurable Life” or the “Larger Sukhāvatīvyūha Sūtra”) who made a vow to practice before becoming the Buddha Amitābha. This understanding corresponds both with the above passage that states that for Yang “Amitābha is the practice” (xing zai mituo 行在弥陀), and also with the fact that both Aśvaghoṣa (maming 馬鳴) and Dharmâkara (fazang 法藏) are both often referred to as ‘bodhisattvas’ (pusa 菩薩) in the Chinese tradition, thus fitting into the parallel structure of this passage. ‘Lianchi’ 蓮池 (‘lotus pond’) is another name for Yunqi Zhuhong 雲棲祩宏 (1535–1615), a famous monk of the Ming dynasty, known for both Chan [Zen] and Pure Land thought. –TN] Yang approved highly of the sort of reductionistic methodology found in the European study of Buddhist classics, and it was exactly this, combined with his intense faith in Buddhism, whereby he hoped he could discover the Buddha’s original intention within the rigorous comparative linguistic and textual study. Because of this, Yang was very displeased when he later realized the strong Christian ideology behind Richard and the religious position of his translation of the Awakening of Faith.
31. One of the most interesting questions he asked in his discussions with Yang was ‘How is it that you, with a Confucian degree, should have ever become a Buddhist?’ and when Yang told him that the Awakening of Faith helped bring about this change of faith, Richard could not restrain himself from studying it. See Richard, Higher Buddhism, 44–45.
32. This point has been almost completely overlooked by people doing research on Richard. Richard did not concretely discuss the author of the book he bought, this ‘Beal’, but in one of Edkins’s papers on Chinese Buddhism he mentioned a Reverend S. Beal who in the nineteenth century released a book titled Buddhism in China, which especially emphasizes the influence of Persian culture, in particular with regard to the belief in the Buddha Amitābha (emituofo 阿彌陀佛). See Edkins, A Volume of Sketches, 419. The Beal discussed by Richard may well be the same individual indicated by Edkins. Because the author was not able to find Beal’s work at the moment, I just leave a word here in this regard. [The person Richard is referring is the English scholar Samuel Beal (1825–1889), and his book Buddhism in China was published in London in 1884, the same year Richard wrote that he bought the book. The passage in Beal’s text about the Awakening of Faith that Richard refers to can be found on page 138: “There is one book, the “K’i-sin-lun,” or, ‘‘treatise for awakening faith,” which has never yet been properly examined, but, so far as is known, is based on doctrines foreign to Buddhism and allied to a perverted form of Christian dogma.” (Beal, Samuel. Buddhism in China. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge; E. & J.B. Young & Co., 1884, 138.) This work can be found in the public domain. See: https://archive.org/details/buddhisminchina00beal –TN]
33. Richard, Higher Buddhism, 4.
34. Tuck, On the Western Interpretation of Nāgārjuna, 8.
35. Clarke, Oriental Enlightenment, 81.
36. Ibid., 81, 130, 133.
37. Edkins thought that Christian missionaries would want to study Buddhism as a way to learn from “the strength of the opposition.” See: Edkins, A Volume of Sketches, 1.
38. Tuck, On the Western Interpretation of Nāgārjuna, 32.
39. Welch, The Buddhist Revival in China, 224.
40. Glüer, ‘The Encounter’.
41. Edkins, A Volume of Sketches, xv.
42. See Richard, Higher Buddhism, 2–4.
43. Richard, Yingguo Li Timotai 英國李提摩, 26–27.
44. Girardot, ‘Max Müller’s “Sacred Books”’, 213–50.
45. Tuck, On the Western Interpretation of Nāgārjuna, 8.
46. Girardot, ‘Max Müller’s “Sacred Books”’.
47. Müller, ‘Preface to the Sacred Books of the East’.
48. See Richard (Li Timotai 李提摩太), Qinli Wan Qing Sishiwu Nian 親歷晚清四十五年, 137.
49. Tuck, On the Western Interpretation of Nāgārjuna, 13.
50. Richard, Yingguo Li Timotai 英國李提摩太, 27. The Chinese text of [Kumārajīva’s translation of] the Diamond Sutra says: ‘When the tathāgata has passed away, after five hundred years, if there is a person that upholds the precepts and practices, in these words they will be able to give rise to a believing mind’ [如來滅後，後五百歲，有持戒修福者，於此章句能生信心; T no. 235, 1: 8.749a28-29] Richard took this passage and interpreted it as a ‘prophecy of Jesus Christ, who appeared five hundred years after Buddha’. See Richard, Qinli Wan Qing Sishiwu Nian 親歷晚清四十五年, 261. [See also Richard, Forty-Five Years in China, 279–80. –TN]
51. William E. Soothill, Timothy Richard of China, 318.
52. With very few exceptions, nineteenth-century European Buddhist studies only focused on important Buddhist texts and historical research, and the reality of living Buddhism was barely touched. In this classical museum-style scholarship, knowledge of Buddhism was turned into ‘Buddhism itself’. In this regard, refer to Lopez, Curators of the Buddha, 7.
53. Glüer, ‘The Encounter’.
54. See Conze, Buddhism, 126. Also, Ryukan Kimura believes that Mahāyāna Buddhism rejects other ideas to establish its own ideological principle only beginning with Nagārjuna and the “Mahāyāna sectarian period,” and that it was preceded the “Mahāyāna text period”, which is thought to mainly “let the principle reveal itself”rather than to censure other schools, thereby showing that the Mahāyāna had inherited elements from previous Buddhist traditions. See his Historical Study of the Terms, x. D. Seyfort Ruegg has recently suggested that the concepts of Mahāyāna Buddhism and the Buddha are not in opposition with each other. There have continuities and discontinuities between them, and a large number of Mahāyāna Buddhist themes can be found in early Buddhist scriptures but are subjected to a more refined exposition. See his ‘Study of the (Earlier) Indian Mahāyāna’, 3–62.
55. Ai Yuese 艾約瑟 (Edkins’s) work, Shijiao Zhengmiu 釋教正謬 can be found in Beijing Daxue Zongjiao Yanjiusuo 北京大學宗教研究所; Zheng Ande 鄭安德, ed., Mingmo Qingchu Yeshuhui Sixiang Wenxian Huibian (yingyinben), 9–11.
56. Edkins, Chinese Buddhism: A Volume of Sketches, xv.
57. Ibid., 363–64.
58. Williamson, ‘Fojiao yuanliu zonghe 佛教源流總核’, 3644.
59. Richard, ‘Yesu Jiaoshi Xieshuxing 耶穌教士寫書信’, 1480.
60. See also Richard, Qinli Wan Qing Sishiwu Nian 親歷晚清四十五年, 192, 320. [Forty-Five Years in China, 211, 334–35. –TN]
61. Refer to Richard, Higher Buddhism, 4–7, 11.
62. [佛教有大乘禪小乘禪之別。初傳者為小乘禪，傳之不遠，亦不久。當耶穌在世之日，小乘變為大乘。今考小乘禪法不知敬奉上帝為尊神。大乘禪法既興，敬拜無量壽佛為無始上帝，又為眾生之父] Li Timotai 李提摩太 (Timothy Richard), ‘Shijiamoni Liezhuan 釋迦牟尼列傳’, Wanguo Gongbao 萬國公報萬國公報 32 (n.d.): 20207.
63. Soothill, Timothy Richard of China, 314–15. Many studies have shown that, in many ways, it was the Nestorian who were influenced by Buddhism during the Tang dyansty, and many terms of their religion reflects a shift toward Buddhism. In this regard, please refer to Zhu Qianzhi 朱謙之, Zhongguo jingjiao 中國景教, 141–43.
64. As described in Higher Buddhism, 27 and Zhi shijie shijia shu 致世界釋家書, 24, 25. On this, Taixu also criticized this as ‘this sort of absurd comment is no different from the Daoists fabricating the text of “Laozi Converting the Barbarians” during the six dynasties period (220–589). Although it is easy for people with insights to see that, as a Christian, Richard wanted to use Buddhism as a way to bring up his own religion and thus fabricated these ideas, the vast majority of people, being unaware of this, are likely to be fooled by his idea’. See Taixu 太虛, ‘Qing guonei an xiwen zhi foxuejia 請國內諳西文之佛學家’.
65. Scholars generally believe that Richard’s theory on the impact of Christianity on the Mahāyāna is basically founded entirely on hypothesis and conjecture, and his discussion on this point is simply fiction. See Soothill, Timothy Richard of China, 315; Glüer, ‘The Encounter’. In addition to this, Alan Hull Walton also criticizes Richard’s lack of historical evidence, and thinks that the influence between Christianity and Buddhism is extremely small, and that on the contrary, it is Christianity that has been influenced by Buddhism within the exchange between East and West. See Walton’s introduction to the new edition of the translation of the Awakening of Faith, 23. Etienne Lamotte believes that, in terms of Buddhist philosophy, the question of what period of time it absorbed influences from foreign civilizations is a nearly impossible or at least extraordinarily difficult problem. Within Buddhism, he was able to find only some influence from the “material” of Aryan civilization, but not the influence of religious ideas. Lamotte found that Indians stuck to their own tradition in terms of philosophy and religion, which did not undergo any Hellenization. For example, Mahāyāna Buddhism, newly arisen in the first century, although it developed to incorporate mystical bhakti (faith) rituals, these rituals were totally consistent with the Mahāyāna concept of ‘bodhi’, placing emphasis on the concepts of wisdom and selfless benefit of others, which was at odds with the Greek traditions of ritual for the sake of one’s own benefit. This shows that there is still a lack of historical evidence for the Aryans influencing the system of Mahāyāna Buddhist thought; Lamotte, History of Indian Buddhism, 427–35. In addition, Western scholars such as Edward Conze (1904–1979), Giuseppe Tucci (1894–1984) and others engaged in a heated debate about the relationship between Indian Mahāyāna Buddhism and Western thought, particularly its relation to Christian Gnosticism, but in the end, this idea remained only a hypothetical possibility that was impossible to determine. D. Seyfort Ruegg has recently suggested that although whether or not early Mahāyāna Buddhism was influenced by the mystical sects of Christianity is a problem that should be addressed cautiously, at least we cannot say that it was directly influenced by these sects precisely because the nature of Mahāyāna Buddhist philosophy, due to its theory of non-dualism, is different from these. See Ruegg, ‘Aspects of the Study of the (Earlier) Indian Mahāyāna’.
66. Said, Dongfang Xue 東方學 (Orientalism), 86.
67. There are differing views among scholars as to whether Richard took Mahāyāna Buddhism as a ‘preparatory phase’ for Christanity or as ‘the Gospel itself’. As Thelle wrote in his article ‘Chuanjiaoshi de zhuanbian 傳教士的轉變’, he believes that Richard saw Mahāyāna Buddhism as ‘preparation phase’ for Christianity, or a ‘Christianity in Disguise’; while He Jianming 何建明 and Lai Pan-Chiu 賴品超 in ‘Fojiao dui jidu zongjiao 佛教對基督宗教’ think that Richard’s understanding of Mahāyāna Buddhism is not that it is a preparation for the Gospel, but that it is ‘the gospel itself’. See Lai Pan-Chiu 賴品超, ed., Jindai zhongguo fojiao 近代中國佛敎, 23.
68. Bassnett and Trivedi, ‘Introduction to Post-Colonial Translation, 3–4. [While both of these quotes appear in the above pages, they are requotations from other sources. The first is cited in the above as Cheyfitz, The Poetics of Imperialism, 104. Cheyfitz’s statement appears to be limited to the Americas, but the author appears to be arguing that the same phenomenon occurred in China as well. The second quote is not from Cheyfitz, but from Tejaswini Niranjana, Siting Translation, 2. –TN]
69. Eckel, ‘Perspectives on the Buddhist–Christian Dialogue’, 50.
70. Richard, Higher Buddhism, 48–49. [The author’s translation into Chinese alters the emphasis of the original slightly, and thus the original quotation could not be used, and is reproduced here: ‘But when the earnest students of both religions penetrated through the different forms and nomenclature into the deep internal meaning of all, they found not only that they aimed at the same thing, the salvation of the world, but that many of their chief teachings were common to both. They no longer feared each other as foes, but helped each other as friends’. –TN] Here, when he puts forward the idea of going beyond ‘nomenclature’ to experience the spirit of the both religions, it was already an expression of a kind of mysticism. Refer to chapter five ‘Words About the Unutterable’ in Ellwood’s book Mysticism and Religion regarding this point. Therefore, in the general introduction to the new edition of Richard’s translation of the Awakening of Faith, Walton wrote that ‘the basis for true religion lies in experience, and not to strictly following orthodoxy or external ceremonies. This is the path of mystery, and exactly as the Awakening of Faith teaches us, that inner experience is the path that leads to God’. Alan Hull Walton, ‘Introduction’, in Awakening of Faith, trans. Timothy Richard (London: Charles Skilton, 1961), 9. [The above is a translation from the author’s Chinese, as the original source could not be obtained. –TN]
71. Richard, Higher Buddhism, 13, 27.
72. Clarke, Oriental Enlightenment: The Encounter Between Asian and Western Thought, 83.
73. Conze, Recent Progress in Buddhist Studies, 154, 151.
74. Williamson, ‘Fojiao yuanliu zonghe 佛教源流總核’.
75. See Richard, Higher Buddhism, 12, 13, 26, 27.
76. Richard himself did not address specifically what in the Gospel of John he came to see in the Lotus Sutra, simply saying that he saw in the Lotus Sutra the teachings of Gospel of John about life, love and light. See Higher Buddhism, 2–4. In fact, comparing the Gospel of John and Lotus Sutra, in particular the ‘Universal Gate of Guanyin (Avalokiteśvara) Bodhisattva’ chapter, both of which place special emphasis on the power of faith, and a great deal of hyperbole on the miracles of saints. Some scholars believe that the Lotus Sutra is truly religious, and it has very few Buddhist theories and philosophies that are discussed in other Buddhist scriptures. Warder, Yindu fojiao shi 印度佛教史, 364. Regarding the emphasis on faith and miracles in the Gospel of John, see Alter and Kermode, eds., The Literary Guide to the Bible, 442, 448.
77. Conze, Buddhism: Its Essence and Development, 156.
78. In a 1895 visit to Mount Tiantai, he was interested entirely in how the religious ceremonies and image worship, i.e. worship of Guanyin, etc., was expressed at each temple and this became important information for his understanding of Buddhism. See Richard, Qinli Wan Qing Sishiwu Nian 親歷晚清四十五年, chap. 13. However, he did not have an understanding of Tiantai Buddhist thought, or how the Tiantai tradition dealt with the relationship between Guanyin faith and their philosophical discourse. Regarding how the Tiantai tradition took up the problem of the metaphysics of faith in Guanyin, please refer to the author’s work ‘Tiantaizong de guanyinlun 天台宗的觀音論’.
79. Edkins, Shijiao Zhengmiu 釋教正謬, 1857.
80. Edkins, A Volume of Sketches, xi, 235–36.
81. After discussing the concepts of heaven and hell in Buddhism and giving a concrete example of someone’s conversion, Edkins wrote, ‘I do not in any way doubt that Buddhist doctrines have been, for the Christian teacher, most important preparation for Christianity; and that, through the spread of these doctrines [of the concepts of Heaven and Hell, etc.], the Chinese people look upon Christianity with much less strangeness, and accept its doctrines with much less difficulty, than otherwise they would have been able to do.’ Edkins, A Volume of Sketches, 368–70. Regarding this point, see also Lai, ‘Buddho-Christian Dialogue in China?’, 81.
82. Richard, Higher Buddhism, 12–27. Richard’s view of Buddhist history is often contradictory, usually taking early or ‘lesser vehicle’ Buddhism to be a rational atheism, and taking the development of the Mahāyāna as the emergence of theism. Here, he also found within the ‘lesser vehicle’ a new type of theological method. As with many of his statements, the explanations change in unpredictable ways according to his needs.
83. Richard, Qinli Wan Qing Sishiwu Nian 親歷晚清四十五年, 174, 175, 321.
84. Richard, Higher Buddhism, 38,39.
85. This idea has been adopted by many translation theorists. For example, some scholars have put forward ideas of ‘translation as rewriting’ or ‘translation as new writing’. See Bassnett and Trivedi, ‘Introduction’, Post-Colonial Translation.
86. Derrida. ‘Babieta’ 巴别塔, 26–31.
87. See Legge’s preface to his translation of the Book of Changes, 517–518.
88. Tymoczko, ‘Ideology and the Position of the Translator’.
89. Richard, Yingguo Li Timotai 英國李提摩太, 25.
90. For these distinctions, see Richard, trans., Awakening of Faith, 41, 53–55, 68, 84.
91. Richard, Higher Buddhism, 51–52.
92. Ibid., 46–47.
93. Müller, ‘Preface to the Sacred Books of the East’.
94. Chen, ‘Fanyi de wenhua zhengzhi’, 4.
95. Conze ‘Recent Progress in Buddhist Studies’, 17.
96. In letter no. 13 of Yang Wenhui and Nanjō’s correspondence, one editor appended the following comments: ‘There was a strong tendency within Timothy Richard’s translation of the Awakening of Faith to assist Buddhists in becoming Christians. A man close to Yang once asked him [about Richard], to which he replied: “at that time, Richard asked me to join him in translating the Awakening of Faith. Richard requested that I discuss and explain [the text] in great depth. Richard also said that he already understood the text. However, when he wrote out his translation, he gave a farfetched interpretation that was clouded with his own interpretations. Because of this, when another westerner later asked me to translate the Śūraṅgama Sūtra and other classics with him, I politely refused’. See Yang Renshan Quanji 楊仁山全集, 491.
97. Taixu 太虛, ‘Qing guonei an xiwen zhi foxuejia’ 請國內諳西文之佛學家.
98. Timothy Richard said that ‘before men had become aware of the teachings of Christianity and Buddhism and first began to discover the significance of key names, after careful investigation, they began to understand that despite their differences, they were in actual fact the same thing’. See Richard, Yingguo Li Timotai 英國李提摩太, 28.
99. Soothill, Timothy Richard of China, 317, 319.
100. With regards to this point please see Cohen, ‘Missionary Approaches’. In actual fact, within modern Chinese intellectual history, the process behind the Chinese translation of Western works frequently veiled strong political significance. Because of this, any analysis on translated works must be conducted in relation to the geopolitical context in which a translation was completed. Take for example Yan Fu, a key figure in modern Chinese history who was representative of the translation on treaties on modern thought. His translations contained objectives of profound political and ideological significance; and were by no means a simple conveyance of information. Rather, under the literary styles of Confucian conservatism, he strategically introduced ‘unorthodox concepts’ which society at the time did not have a capacity to accommodate so as to ‘act as a political agent of reform’. This ‘entire translation process was subject to problems relating to authority’; Chan, ‘Translation Principles and the Translator’s Agenda’, 67, 69 (Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 2002). Lu Xun had long been conscious of this point. Please refer to his letters on translation to Qu Qiubai; See ‘Guanyu fanyi de tongxin’ 關於翻譯的通信.