"Thesis approved for the degree of doctor of philosophy in the University of Calcutta, 1907." / On cover: Indian logic: mediæval school.

No description available.

This dissertation explores how Chan Buddhists made the unprecedented claim to a level of religious authority on par with the historical Buddha Śākyamuni and, in the process, invented what it means to be a buddha in China. This claim helped propel the Chan tradition to dominance of elite monastic Buddhism during the Song dynasty (960-1279), licensed an outpouring of Chan literature treated as equivalent to scripture, and changed the way Chinese Buddhists understood their own capacity for religious authority in relation to the historical Buddha and the Indian homeland of Buddhism. But the claim itself was fraught with complication. After all, according to canonical Buddhist scriptures, the Buddha was easily recognizable by the “marks of the great man” that adorned his body, while the same could not be said for Chan masters in the Song. What, then, distinguished Chan masters from everyone else? What authorized their elite status and granted them the authority of buddhas? According to what normative ideals did Chan aspirants pursue liberation, and by what standards did Chan masters evaluate their students to determine who was worthy of admission into an elite Chan lineage? How, in short, could one recognize a buddha in Song-dynasty China? The Chan tradition never answered this question once and for all; instead, the question broadly animated Chan rituals, institutional norms, literary practices, and visual cultures. My dissertation takes a performative approach to the analysis of Chan hagiographies, discourse records, commentarial collections, and visual materials, mobilizing the tradition’s rich archive to measure how Chan interventions in Buddhist tradition changed the landscape of elite Chinese Buddhism and participated in the epochal changes attending China’s Tang-to-Song transition.

<p>Early art in Buddhist cultic sites was characterized by the absence of anthropomorphicimages of the Buddha. The Buddha was instead represented by different signs, like awheel, a tree, a seat and footprints. This study emphasizes the transformation this artunderwent from simple signs to carefully made aniconic compositions representing theBuddha in a narrative context.</p><p>Buddhist aniconic art has been explained by a prohibition against images of theBuddha or by a doctrine that made it inappropriate to depict the body of the Buddha.This study rejects such explanations. Likewise, the practice of different meditationalexercises cannot explain this transformation. Instead, it is important to understand thatearly art at Buddhist cultic sites consisted of simple signs belonging to a shared sacredIndian culture. This art reflected a notion of auspiciousness, fertility and abundance.The formation of Buddhist aniconic art was indicated by the connection of these auspi- cious signs with a narrative tradition about the life and teachings of the Buddha.</p><p>The study emphasizes the importance Sakyamuni Buddha played in the formation ofBuddhist art. The Buddha was interpreted as an expression of auspiciousness, but hewas also connected with a soteriological perspective. Attention is also focused on thefact that the development of Buddhist art and literature was a gradual and mutualprocess. Furthermore, Buddhist aniconic art presaged the making of anthropomorphicimages of the Buddha. It was not an innovation of motive for the Buddhists when theystarted to make anthropomorphic images of the Buddha. He was already there.</p>

Thesis--New York University, 1973. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 379-388).

Early art in Buddhist cultic sites was characterized by the absence of anthropomorphicimages of the Buddha. The Buddha was instead represented by different signs, like awheel, a tree, a seat and footprints. This study emphasizes the transformation this artunderwent from simple signs to carefully made aniconic compositions representing theBuddha in a narrative context. Buddhist aniconic art has been explained by a prohibition against images of theBuddha or by a doctrine that made it inappropriate to depict the body of the Buddha.This study rejects such explanations. Likewise, the practice of different meditationalexercises cannot explain this transformation. Instead, it is important to understand thatearly art at Buddhist cultic sites consisted of simple signs belonging to a shared sacredIndian culture. This art reflected a notion of auspiciousness, fertility and abundance.The formation of Buddhist aniconic art was indicated by the connection of these auspi- cious signs with a narrative tradition about the life and teachings of the Buddha. The study emphasizes the importance Sakyamuni Buddha played in the formation ofBuddhist art. The Buddha was interpreted as an expression of auspiciousness, but hewas also connected with a soteriological perspective. Attention is also focused on thefact that the development of Buddhist art and literature was a gradual and mutualprocess. Furthermore, Buddhist aniconic art presaged the making of anthropomorphicimages of the Buddha. It was not an innovation of motive for the Buddhists when theystarted to make anthropomorphic images of the Buddha. He was already there.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2004. / Document formatted into pages; contains xvi,375 p.; also contains graphics. Includes bibliographical references. Abstract available online via OhioLINK's ETD Center; full text release delayed at author's request until 2009 Aug. 18.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1996. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [245]-266).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, Los Angeles, 1985. / Includes abstract and vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 306-311).

No description available.