Geschichte und Geschichten im ostasiatischen Buddhismus: Hagiographie zwischen Historiographie und Erbauung
This paper addresses the question why the Japanese did not fully adopt Chinese patterns of religious historiography despite the ob-vious dependence of Japanese religious literature from Chinese models. It is argued that even early “secular” historiography in Japa...
| Published in: | Geschichten und Geschichte |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic/Print Article |
| Language: | German |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Uppsala Universitet
2010
|
| In: |
Geschichten und Geschichte
|
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | This paper addresses the question why the Japanese did not fully adopt Chinese patterns of religious historiography despite the ob-vious dependence of Japanese religious literature from Chinese models. It is argued that even early “secular” historiography in Japan emancipated itself from Chinese paradigms due to different concepts of legitimate rulership in China and Japan. Accordingly Japanese historiography – secular and religious – developed inde-pendently. Most striking is the relative insignificance of trans-denominational collections of biographies of Buddhist monks in the style of the Chinese Gaoseng zhuan which may be partly explained by the early fragmentation of Japanese Buddhism. Other reasons are the different positions of the Chinese and the Japanese Buddhist orders in their respective social environments as well as rather blurred boundaries between monks, lay people, and superhuman beings. |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Literaturverzeichnis: S. 52-56 |
| ISBN: | 9155477453 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Geschichten und Geschichte
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.15496/publikation-32907 HDL: 10900/91526 |