Ch'an Dao Links:

China: Early Examples of Buddhist Transmission from India! (13.5.2025)
By Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD

Picture
Three Well-Known Chinese Buddhist Pilgrims and the Routes They Took To India!
Translator’s Note: Ancient India possessed a flourishing empire (particularly between 300-100 BCE) that spread the tenants of Brahmanism outside the geographical boundaries of India throughout South-East Asia. As can be seen by studying the architecture of Thailand, Java, and Cambodia, etc, countries that are considered Buddhist today – were originally Hindu. Furthermore, different schools of Buddhist thought would come and go as times changed – with Islam eventually putting an end to this Indian influence. In his 1967 book entitled “The Indianization of China and South-East Asia” – the author “HG Quaritch Wales” – suggests that between 500-100 BCE, Chinese ideas of art, design, and construction may well have been influenced by this expanding Indian cultural presence, as Chinese migrants encountered Indian migrants throughout South-East Asia and along the Silk Road. Furthermore, groups of Indian explorers and traders were permitted to enter Chinese territory and build small communities. These examples of interaction provides a number of explanations as to how it was that ancient China knew of Hindu scriptures. Therefore, the study of architecture and archaeology, alongside the study of the available historical texts (philology), proves that a) China did not exist within a cultural vacuum during the 500-years leading up to the common-era, and b) China and India were indeed engaged in a rich and dynamic exchange of culture and ideas during exactly the same time-period. It seems strange, given this evidence, that the forces of modern academia (originating in the West – but affecting the East) place so much effort in disproving the presence of Indian Buddhism in China at any point prior to the common-era. Indeed, many scholars either do not know of any evidence suggesting an early contact – or automatically reject any such evidence as it does not fit into the current (preferred) interpretation. Many presumptions need to be deconstructed and logically re-examined. There are always exceptions to the rule – many in fact as regards to scholars who do speak-up and voice the other-side. In this regard, I must point-out the excellent (1924) work of the American Prof. KJ Saunders – Lecturer at Berkeley - who does recognise at least one of the pre-common-era interactions between India and China I present below (pertaining to the Qin Dynasty).
ACW (14.5.2025)
​
Picture
Tripitaka Master Jnanabhaisajya - 6th Century Indian Pilgrim to China Who Passed-Away Sat-Up in Meditation!
The modern scholarly consensus is that the Buddha lived during the 6th-5th centuries BCE. This is the general view also found within (secular) Chinese scholarship – but it is not the position as taught within traditional Chinese Buddhism. A Theravada Council held in the 1950s accepted the Western scholarly position regarding the biographical dates of the Buddha – which subtracted 500-years off of the assumed traditional dates (arriving at 563–483 BCE – although there are variations on this theme). The Theravada School once accepted the Buddha to have lived at a much earlier time. Whatever the case, Master Xu Yun did not accept the Western date – or the Theravada embracing of it. So divisive was this debate that Charles Luk decided to excise a Dharma-Talk Master Xu Yun (1840-1959) gave in his biography regarding the traditional Chinese Buddhist viewpoint – which states that the Buddha lived between 1029/28-949/48 BCE – a lifetime of exactly 80-years. Of course, when the 500-years were retracted – the 80-year lifespan was retained. Master Xu Yun explains “why” this date is upheld to be true amongst the monastics of Chinese Buddhists. A Buddhist monk (Kasyapa-Matanga) visited China during the 1st century CE during the reign of the Later Han Emperor Ming (r. 58-75 CE) whom he instructed - and when discussing the history of the Buddha with Chinese scholars – this date was agreed upon.

From a sound academic foundation, I have been told that Buddhism spread to China from India between the 1st century BCE and 1st century CE. There is a problem with this assumption in that during the 1st century BCE (and earlier) the dynastic records of China contain lists of Brahmanical (Hindu) scriptures that are still known in India today. Although none of the Hindu scriptures known in early China are extant today – the catalogue-lists used by the imperial libraries at that time are still in existence. If the Buddha lived around 500 BCE (rather than 1000 BCE) – is this enough time for his teachings to have matured and spread outside of India? The argument against this is that his teachings were passed on by word of mouth for about 400-years after his death. This event could have happened at either 549/48 BCE or 83 BCE (an added complication is that the Indian Emperor Ashoka ordered that certain Buddhist Sutras should be engraved on stone-pillars during the 3rd century BCE – but as this event happened outside of the Buddhist establishment – it can be placed to one side and used solely for context). Given that Buddhism is supposed to have arrived in China between the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE – is the later date likely to be true or even possible? Of course, Buddhist monks could have brought the oral teachings to China prior to these teachings being written-down – but if the Hindu texts were fully written-down by the 1st century BCE (and earlier) presumably in a mature form - why would the Buddha’s teachings not be similarly recorded? The Buddha, despite being a high-caste Hindu, was nevertheless illiterate. This is much more likely a scenario if the Buddha was born around 1000 BCE rather than 500 BCE – the latter date being when literacy was becoming far more established amongst the upper echelons of Indian society. In the ancient world, of course, wisdom was not directly shackled to the agency of literacy - as it is today.

What is interesting is that there was official resistance from the Chinese nobility to the spread of Indian Buddhism amongst the Han Chinese people (the ordinary Chinese people were ordered to venerate their own indigenous traditions). The written evidence seems to suggest that there were small communities of Indians living in different parts of ancient China and that it was only these people who were allowed to propagate Buddhism amongst themselves. Ethnic Indians were permitted to build Buddhist Temples and were allowed to study the written texts of Buddhism. Such foreign communities were allowed to welcome Buddhist monastics from India, and it seems this arrangement lasted for the first four-hundred years of the common-era (at least this is when the written evidence emerges in China). As Chinese attitudes softened, Indian Buddhist monks were permitted to teach Han Chinese people who were interested. It could well be that Han Chinese people also learned from the lay ethnic Indian communities – communities which might not have been permanent – but linked to trade and moderated by the changing seasons and the vagaries of the political climate. Prior to the common-era, if Buddhism was present in China, it was probably only as a foible known to the Chinese nobility – perhaps nothing but a minor distraction - or a matter of polite conversation. It was only during the common-era that the dynastic authorities got involved – when Indian Buddhism spread throughout the masses and threatened to undermine the State’s authority and its command-and-control mechanisms.

Eventually, with the conversion of major members of the nobility and even the Emperor himself, Indian Buddhism was finally tolerated – with Chinese Buddhist monastics travelling to India from at least 400 CE onwards (although there is some evidence of earlier pilgrimages) to gather Sutras and learn the genuine Dharma. Below, I convey three “early” (pre-Han) references found within the ancient Chinese dynastic records. These texts suggest that Buddhism was known in China as far back as the time of Confucius (551-479 BCE). If correct, these extracts suggest the Buddha was born at an earlier date to that suggested by modern Western scholarship.

1) 5th Century BCE - Master Lie (列子 – Lie Zi) is a Daoist text compiled by Lie Yu Kou (列圄寇) [450-375 BCE] and believed to reflect 5th century BCE attitudes throughout ancient China. Within the “Zhongni” (仲尼) Chapter of the Liezi (“Zhongni” is the courtesy name of “Confucius” – possibly meaning “he who permanently stands at the harmonious centre of reality”) – Confucius is recorded as saying:

“I know there is a Sage in the West.”

“丘闻西方有圣人焉”

Later (Tang Dynasty) scholars believed Confucius was referring to the Buddha in India. Confucius goes on to state that “This Sage does not govern – and yet there is order throughout the land” and so on. Interestingly, for the word “I” in the above extract, the ideogram “丘” (Qiu) is employed. This is one of the first-names of Confucius – whose real name was “孔丘” (Kong Qiu). In other words, the translation could read “Qiu knows there is a Sage in the West” – as he appears to be referring to himself in the third-person.

2) 4th Century BCE - Selection of Lost & Prohibited Records (拾遗记 – Shi Yi Ji) written by the Daoist hermit - Wang Jia (王嘉) [d. 390 CE]. This is a book of semi-legendary and apocryphal Chinese historical stories compiled during the Eastern Jin Dynasty (almost certainly from earlier texts) – comprised of 10-volumes. Within it, Wang Jia states the following:

‘During the 7th year of the reign of King Zhao (昭) of Yan (317 BCE) – it is recorded “From the country of Mu Xu [沐胥] (i.e. India) - a Man of Daoist Arts (道术人 – Dao Shu Ren) named Shi Luo He Xi (尸罗荷锡) came to pay homage whilst holding a bottle. He said, “It has taken me five-years to reach the capital of Yan”. This was the beginning of the introduction of Buddhism into China.’

“沐胥（即印度）之国来朝有道术人名尸罗荷锡持瓶，云：‘发其国五年乃至燕都’”

3) 3rd Century BCE - Successive Dynasties Three Treasures Record (历代三宝纪 – Li Dai San Bao Ji) – this text was compiled by the Buddhist monk (and Sutra-translator) known as Fei Chang Fang (费长房) [c. mid to late 6th century CE). In Volume I it is recorded that ‘During the 4th year of the reign of Emperor Qin Shi Huang (秦始皇) [243 BC] – eighteen wise "Sramana" (沙门 – Sha Man) – (or “Buddhist monastics”) arrived (presumably “from India” – but the name “India” is not used in the Chinese-language text). This group included the monk “Shi Li Fang” (释利防) – who brought Buddhist Sutras to China as a gift. Qin Shi Huang, however, did not like the Buddhist teachings, and had this group of Buddhist monks imprisoned. During the night, a “Vajra” (金刚 – Jin Gang) – or “Diamond Thunderbolt” – smashed its way through the structure of the prison building and freed Shi Li Fang and all the other monks!’

During the Tang Dynasty, many scholars believed this reference to be accurate and correct.

“卷一载秦始皇四年（公元前243年）沙门释利防等一十八贤者携经来化秦始皇，秦始皇不信佛教，把他们关进牢里。半夜，有金刚打破牢狱把释利防等人救走”
​

©opyright: Adrian Chan-Wyles (ShiDaDao) 2025.
​
English Language Reference:

https://icbi.weebly.com/degeneration-of-the-sangha-in-the-dharma-ending-age-by-chrsquoan-master-xu-yun.html

Chinese Language References:

https://baike.baidu.com/item/王嘉/5146389

https://baike.baidu.com/item/拾遗记/292676

https://baike.baidu.com/item/列子/190377

https://baike.baidu.com/item/费长房/6658531

https://baike.baidu.com/item/沙门/231148

​https://baike.baidu.com/item/历代三宝纪/2389951

Further Reading:

Charles Luk, Ch’an and Zen Teaching – Third Series, Rider, (1962) Hard-Back First Edition – Contain Photograph Tripitaka Master Jnanabhaisajya - 6th Century Indian Pilgrim Who Passed-Away Sat-Up in Meditation. In later editions this photograph is nolonger included.

HG Quaritch Wales, The Indianization of China and South-East Asia HG Quaritch Wales, Quaritch Ltd, (1967)

Kanai Lal Hazra, Buddhism in India as Described by the Chinese Pilgrims AD 399-689, Munishiram Manoharlal, (2002)
​
KJ Saunders, Epochs in Buddhist History, Pilgrims Books (Delhi), (1924 – Re-Print 1998)