Translated and annotated with a Corean recension of the Chinese text
BY JAMES LEGGE
PREFACE
Several times during my long residence in Hong Kong I endeavoured to
read through the "Narrative of Fa-hien;" but though interested with
the graphic details of much of the work, its columns bristled so
constantly - now with his phonetic representations of Sanskrit words,
and now with his substitution for them of their meanings in Chinese
characters, and I was, moreover, so much occupied with my own special
labours on the Confucian Classics, that my success was far from
satisfactory. When Dr. Eitel's "Handbook for the Student of Chinese
Buddhism" appeared in 1870, the difficulty occasioned by the Sanskrit
words and names was removed, but the other difficulty remained; and I
was not able to look into the book again for several years. Nor had I
much inducement to do so in the two copies of it which I had been able
to procure, on poor paper, and printed from blocks badly cut at first,
and so worn with use as to yield books the reverse of attractive in
their appearance to the student.
In the meantime I kept studying the subject of Buddhism from various
sources; and in 1878 began to lecture, here in Oxford, on the Travels
with my Davis Chinese scholar, who was at the same time Boden Sanskrit
scholar. As we went on, I wrote out a translation in English for my
own satisfaction of nearly half the narrative. In the beginning of
last year I made Fa-hien again the subject of lecture, wrote out a
second translation, independent of the former, and pushed on till I
had completed the whole.
The want of a good and clear text had been supplied by my friend, Mr.
Bunyiu Nanjio, who sent to me from Japan a copy, the text of which is
appended to the translation and notes, and of the nature of which some
account is given in the Introduction, and towards the end of this
Preface.
The present work consists of three parts: the Translation of Fa-hien's
Narrative of his Travels; copious Notes; and the Chinese Text of my
copy from Japan.
It is for the Translation that I hold myself more especially
responsible. Portions of it were written out three times, and the
whole of it twice. While preparing my own version I made frequent
reference to previous translations: - those of M. Abel Remusat, "Revu,
complete, et augmente d'eclaircissements nouveaux par MM. Klaproth et
Landress" (Paris, 1836); of the Rev. Samuel Beal (London, 1869), and
his revision of it, prefixed to his "Buddhist Records of the Western
World" (Trubner's Oriental Series, 1884); and of Mr. Herbert A. Giles,
of H.M.'s Consular Service in China (1877). To these I have to add a
series of articles on "Fa-hsien and his English Translators," by Mr.
T. Watters, British Consul at I-Chang (China Review, 1879, 1880).
Those articles are of the highest value, displaying accuracy of
Chinese scholarship and an extensive knowledge of Buddhism. I have
regretted that Mr. Watters, while reviewing others, did not himself
write out and publish a version of the whole of Fa-hien's narrative.
If he had done so, I should probably have thought that, on the whole,
nothing more remained to be done for the distinguished Chinese pilgrim
in the way of translation. Mr. Watters had to judge of the comparative
merits of the versions of Beal and Giles, and pronounce on the many
points of contention between them. I have endeavoured to eschew those
matters, and have seldom made remarks of a critical nature in defence
of renderings of my own.
The Chinese narrative runs on without any break. It was Klaproth who
divided Remusat's translation into forty chapters. The division is
helpful to the reader, and I have followed it excepting in three or
four instances. In the reprinted Chinese text the chapters are
separated by a circle in the column.
In transliterating the names of Chinese characters I have generally
followed the spelling of Morrison rather than the Pekinese, which is
now in vogue. We cannot tell exactly what the pronunciation of them
was, about fifteen hundred years ago, in the time of Fa-hien; but the
southern mandarin must be a shade nearer to it than that of Peking at
the present day. In transliterating the Indian names I have for the
most part followed Dr. Eitel, with such modification as seemed good
and in harmony with growing usage.
For the Notes I can do little more than claim the merit of selection
and condensation. My first object in them was to explain what in the
text required explanation to an English reader. All Chinese texts, and
Buddhist texts especially, are new to foreign students. One has to do
for them what many hundreds of the ablest scholars in Europe have done
for the Greek and Latin Classics during several hundred years, and
what the thousands of critics and commentators have been doing of our
Sacred Scriptures for nearly eighteen centuries. There are few
predecessors in the field of Chinese literature into whose labours
translators of the present century can enter. This will be received, I
hope, as a sufficient apology for the minuteness and length of some of
the notes. A second object in them was to teach myself first, and then
others, something of the history and doctrines of Buddhism. I have
thought that they might be learned better in connexion with a lively
narrative like that of Fa-hien than by reading didactic descriptions
and argumentative books. Such has been my own experience. The books
which I have consulted for these notes have been many, besides Chinese
works. My principal help has been the full and masterly handbook of
Eitel, mentioned already, and often referred to as E.H. Spence Hardy's
"Eastern Monachism" (E.M.) and "Manual of Buddhism" (M.B.) have been
constantly in hand, as well as Rhys Davids' Buddhism, published by the
Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, his Hibbert Lectures, and
his Buddhist Suttas in the Sacred Books of the East, and other
writings.
