諸佛菩薩圣像贊

內(nèi)容概要

全書(shū)共收錄尊神360簡(jiǎn)本尊，每頁(yè)都有刊印黑邊框，邊框內(nèi)，佛像的大背光、身光、蓮座和蓮座上的蓮瓣、云紋、連珠紋都是墨線刊印輪廓，再以墨線勾勒輪廓，局部以淡墨暈染，以增加其立體感，尊神像及背景裝飾部分為手繪。附漢文像贊360節(jié)，一像一贊，每贊為六言四句，往往提及尊神的名號(hào)、所持法器、身體姿勢(shì)、法力功能等內(nèi)容，應(yīng)是對(duì)照尊神圖像而撰寫。每像上方題漢文，下方題藏文，左邊題滿文，右邊題蒙古文。漢、滿、蒙古文及千字文編號(hào)均是朱字，藏文為濃硃堆書(shū)，有凸起感。由于是用毛筆書(shū)寫，所以藏文與滿蒙文相比，字體不太規(guī)整。且滿蒙藏文均有拼寫錯(cuò)誤，本次出版為了保持全書(shū)原貌基本未作校改。尊名漢文書(shū)寫較為稚拙，與贊文的漢文書(shū)體嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)端正相比，水平相去甚遠(yuǎn)(圖二)。另外，部分尊神背面頭、喉、心間(分別代表人的身、語(yǔ)、意)書(shū)有朱紅色藏文字OM、AH、HOM，作為開(kāi)光的標(biāo)志。篇首有漢文序。

書(shū)籍目錄

導(dǎo)讀三百六十尊佛像贊一、般若祖師天字十尊  龍樹(shù)祖師  無(wú)著祖師  圣天祖師  田親祖師  明象祖師  法聲祖師  德光祖師  釋迦光祖師  青目祖師  善天祖師二、秘密祖師地字八尊  喜樂(lè)和祖師  魯兮巴祖師  甘扎巴祖師  吉禮斯納巴祖師  拉禮達(dá)祖師  莊秘巴祖師  德樂(lè)巴祖師  那羅巴祖師三、菩提道祖師元字十尊  阿第沙祖師  布倫祖師(布頓祖師)  宗喀巴祖師  嘉勒擦布祖師  開(kāi)主補(bǔ)祖師  頭輩達(dá)賴?yán)? 班臣羅卜藏垂極嘉勒參  五輩達(dá)賴?yán)? 班臣羅卜藏葉施  達(dá)賴?yán)锔晾詹丶涯麓杷?、大秘密佛黃字三十四尊  大持金剛  金剛文殊秘密佛  精明文殊  不動(dòng)金剛秘密佛  觀自在秘密佛  ……五、諸樣秘密佛 宇字十四尊六、五方佛 宙宇 五尊七、三十五佛 洪字 三十五尊八、十字佛 荒字 十尊九、六勇佛 日字 六尊十、藥師佛 月字 七尊十一、諸樣佛  盈字 五尊十二、文殊化像菩薩 昃字 十三瘭……

章節(jié)摘錄

　　He also for the first time explained that his father Prof. Raghu Virahad taken a set of microfiche images of the Zhufo at the National Libraryin Beijing when he visited China in 1955. So, while better technologyavailable at the later date allowed clearer reproduction, both the imagesnow held in India and those published by Clark were from the same source,the former microfiche and the latter photographs. For their publicationChandra and Bunce computer enhanced the photographs of the microfichedimages, enlarging them and increasing clarity. Chandra felt the Zhufosartist was clearly Han Chinese, quite possibly the famous contemporaryartist Ding Guanpeng. This, however is purely supposition unsupported byany evidence provided, not even a comparison of artistic styles. He drawsparticular attention to differences between the iconographic attributes ofBh.rku.tf （256）, and those described in the Indian Buddhist literature andfound in other extant images, continuing that this indicated that the StatePreceptor 1Cang skya must have drawn upon multiple Tibetan sources andthat clues might be found in his collected works..　　In his introduction Professor Bunces research proves still morefastidious, perhaps at times a bit overly so.　　First, he disagrees with Clarks statement that the Zhu~o is a uniquemanuscript. He objects that as the text of Zhufo is not handwritten and itsillustrations hand illuminated it cannot properly be termed a manuscript （L.manus scriptus）.　　Examining the photographs he discovered that there are breakscharacteristic of a wood-cut print in the border surrounding eachimage. However, there is a gradation in the shading in the lotus thrones,garment folds and some of the landscape elements adding an increaseddimensionality to the images, an effect not normally possible with woodblock printing. This would imply that the images were painted. Bunceattempts to resolve this contradiction suggesting the effect was possiblyachieved through hand coloring after the printing or that the multiple blockmethod was used （figure 4）.

圖書(shū)封面

圖書(shū)標(biāo)簽Tags

無(wú)

評(píng)論、評(píng)分、閱讀與下載

---

    諸佛菩薩圣像贊 PDF格式下載

---