The Chinese Buddhist Approach to Science: the Case of Astronomy and Calendars
- PDF / 585,879 Bytes
- 17 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 66 Downloads / 160 Views
The Chinese Buddhist Approach to Science: the Case of Astronomy and Calendars Jeffrey Kotyk 1 Accepted: 7 September 2020/ # Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
Abstract This study reviews the Chinese Buddhist approach to astronomy and calendars during the first millennium CE. I demonstrate that although Indian astronomical and calendrical concepts were often translated into Chinese Buddhist literature, few of these conventions were ever actually implemented in China. I also demonstrate that the Chinese sangha relied upon secular and/or Indian astronomical materials in translation. I highlight the eighth-century monk Yixing as a unique example of a Chinese Buddhist monk who also acted as a court astronomer, but I argue that despite his identity as a monk, his career as an astronomer was actually separate from his activities within Buddhism. Finally, with additional reference to Amoghavajra, I argue that Buddhism as an institution in China did not facilitate developments in astronomy or calendrical science, but rather it took a deferential attitude toward these fields. Keywords Yixing . Amoghavajra . Śubhakarasiṃha . Navagraha . Astronomy . Astrology .
Chinese calendar
Introduction This study explores the medieval Chinese Buddhist approach to calendrical science and astronomy. I will demonstrate that in most instances, Chinese Buddhists deferred to state and/or non-Buddhist resources in matters related to calendars and astronomy, even though in theory, they had the religious liberty to involve themselves in such matters as adherents of the Mahāyāna. The primary reason for this was that Buddhist literature did not offer the necessary intellectual and mathematical tools, even when these were necessary for a Buddhist practice. I will show that the absence of detailed astronomy and mathematics in Buddhist scriptures, as well as the reluctance to canonize such knowledge (that is to say, make such knowledge a formal component in Buddhist * Jeffrey Kotyk [email protected]
1
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Journal of Dharma Studies
learning), rendered Chinese Buddhism unable to participate in the development of astronomy and calendrical science in China, where an additional obstacle was state prohibitions on the private study of astronomy. This study is primarily interested in what the Chinese Buddhist engagement with astronomy, mathematics, and calendrical science meant for this religious community, rather than attempting to gauge scientific progress or accuracy in comparison, for example, with the West. I feel this would be unnecessary and fruitless. Needham (1959, p. 150) rightfully pointed out, “Few mathematical works before the Renaissance were at all comparable in achievement with the wealth and power of the developments which took place afterwards. It is pointless, therefore, to subject the old Chinese contributions to the yardstick of modern mathematics.” There is, however, the question of what role did Buddhism have in the history of science in China. Ronan and Needham (197
Data Loading...
