Kumarajiva, a fourth-century monk and scholar responsible for translating Buddhist texts into Chinese, is venerated by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) for developing Mahayana Buddhism in China. He is held up as a historical figure to in pursuit of several key objectives; highlighting the supremacy of Chinese Buddhism as part of the CCP’s strategy to Sinicize the faith; emphasizing the importance of the Silk Road as a predecessor to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI); cementing China’s status as a civilization with far-reaching roots; and justifying contested territorial claims using historical revisionism and what is known as frontier archaeology. All of these aims have gained newfound centrality under President Xi Jinping.
Kumarajiva hailed from the Kucha kingdom, an ancient Buddhism kingdom that was located along the northern part of the Silk Road, in what is now modern-day Aksu Prefecture, Xinjiang. This kingdom had submitted to the Han Dynasty in the second century CE, but regained some degree of independence again during the period in which Kumarajiva was born, around the year 344 CE.
Kumarajiva’s father was from Kashmir, and his mother was Kuchean. He spent time traveling through India and Central Asia, where he learned about Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism. Traveling to Gansu province and finally to Chang’an (today’s Xi’an), at one point along the way he was imprisoned for several years, as the emperor who had called him to court was overthrown. The new emperor eventually released Kumarajiva, allowing him to finally reach the imperial capital of Chang’an, where he received the royal title of “Teacher of the Nation.”
There, Kumarajiva set up a translation bureau, where he presided over a team of reportedly around 8,000 disciples that translated numerous sutras into scrolls of Buddhist scriptures from Sanskrit into Chinese, including the famous Lotus Sutra. It is said that Kumarajiva’s time in captivity helped him better understand the Chinese language, which allowed him to become such a skilled translator of the holy texts. In fact, his system of translation was also the basis for the later development of pinyin romanization of the Chinese language.
Kumarajiva is credited with being able to convey the essence of Buddhism to Chinese society in ways that had never been done before, thus contributing in a profound way to the spread and understanding of the religion and its philosophy in China. His translations are considered so well-done and respected that they are still in use today. Kumarajiva’s ability to integrate Buddhist principles with Confucian and Taoist ideals was absolutely essential in creating a uniquely Chinese flavor of the faith. Today, this is touted as part of the CCP’s Sinicized version of the religion, sometimes referred to as Buddhism with Chinese characteristics.
Kumarajiva is revered in China. China’s state media emphasize how his translated sutras contributed to the Pure Land and Tiantai sects of Buddhism and ultimately traveled on from China to Korea, Japan, and Southeast Asia, greatly influencing Buddhism in those places. In a CGTN story discussing the importance of Kumarajiva and Buddhism in Xinjiang, one monk talked about how Japan also learned Chan Buddhism (Japanese Zen Buddhism) from China.
Other typical lines in China frame the distinct roles India and China played in Buddhism’s history, such as claims that “Buddhism originated in India, but it flourished in China” or that “China gradually became the center of Buddhism in Asia. In India, Buddhism has declined and in China it grew.” In this narrative, India was host to a more primitive version of Buddhism that was then essentially upgraded within China, from which it spread to other countries. All of this can be seen as part of a desire to paint China as a central hub of the Buddhist faith, to project an image of being a grand civilizational power, bolstering China’s status both domestically to its own people and globally to potential partners and competitors.
There was recent talk of a biopic being in production that would detail Kumarajiva’s life’s journey. A state media article that discussed the film noted that its producers said that it would help promote the cultural exchange and cooperation that occurred along the Silk Road. A biopic on Kumarajiva was said to “perfectly align with the current interest in the Belt and Road, and help convey Chinese history and culture to people around the world.” In other words, the CCP wants to use Kumarajiva to “tell China’s story well,” in accordance with Xi Jinping’s mantra. Kumarajiva himself, thanks to his family background, as well his travels and work, acts as an ideal icon that the CCP can hold up to promote the Silk Road’s role in bridging civilizations, with China at its helm.
The CCP also uses Kumarajiva to propagate the propaganda point of “ethnic harmony” among China’s diverse ethnic minority groups. This is particularly important when it comes to the CCP’s narrative on Xinjiang, so it is convenient that Kumarajiva hails from that region. One CGTN story covered this aspect, highlighting both the religious and ethnic coexistence among different groups in Xinjiang and Kumarajiva’s role as part of that dynamic.
There is also an interesting duality at play. On one hand, Chinese state media discuss how Islam conquered present-day Xinjiang by force, in contrast to the natural success of Buddhism there. Yet, on the other hand, the CCP pushes the idea of Islam and Buddhism existing together in peace in Xinjiang as the two most practiced religions in the region. This may be to subtly imply the superiority of Buddhism, which the CCP considers Chinese, in contrast to a foreign religion like Islam, but the party also must drive home the point of harmony to stave off accusations of cultural genocide and human rights abuses against Uyghur Muslims in China.
Chinese state media also showcase several historical sites and landmarks that are relevant to Kumarajiva. First, the ruins of Subash Temple north of Kuqa (where Kumarajiva was born) in the southern part of Xinjiang were highlighted in one story as an example of the historical prominence of Buddhism in the region. Another key site is the Kizil Caves, which are listed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Chinese state media emphasize that the grottoes had no protection until the People’s Republic of China was founded in 1949, a way of crediting the CCP as the guardians of the nation’s history.
A 2019 Global Times photo essay entitled “Kizil Caves: China’s earliest Buddhist complex” contained images of the caves’ interior. The walls are painted with depictions of the Silk Road and the way Buddhism spread along these routes, from the western regions eastwards, from Xinjiang to Xi’an – mirroring the same path Kumarajiva himself took. Such articles about the grottoes repeat the point that they are “proof of the close exchanges between the Central Plain and Xinjiang as well as other regions along the Silk Road.” The term “Central Plain” refers to a northeastern section of China that is often employed to also denote what the CCP considers the true or original Chinese civilization, dominated by the Han ethnic group.
This equation – the linking of the Central Plain to Xinjiang, or other contested areas at China’s edges, like Tibet, for example – is abundant in China’s museums, and represents the subtlety of language the CCP uses. In reality, the point being made is that these territories are, and always have been, part of China throughout history. Sites such as the Kizil Caves act as concrete, physical evidence of such claims; this is an example of the CCP’s use of frontier archaeology in action.
Another landmark associated with Kumarajiva is the White Horse Pagoda in Dunhuang, Gansu Province, built to honor the horse on which Kumarajiva carried the Buddhist scriptures on his journey from Kucha to Dunhuang. There is also the Kumarajiva Pagoda at Caotang Temple near Xi’an, which was built to hold Kumarajiva’s remains – not to be confused with the Kumarajiva Pagoda located in Wuwei, Gansu Province, where the scholar’s tongue is said to be buried.
Kumarajiva’s legacy is deeply entwined with the CCP’s broader objectives, from the Sinicization of Buddhism to legitimizing territorial claims and bolstering China’s historical and civilizational narrative. His life and work serve as a powerful symbol for China’s modern ambitions, particularly in shaping its image as the true steward of Buddhism and the inheritor of the Silk Road’s legacy. By highlighting Kumarajiva’s contributions, the CCP not only strengthens its ideological control over religion, but also reinforces its geopolitical outreach.
Yet, this narrative is not without contention – whether from India, which sees Buddhism as part of its own historical and cultural domain, or from those who challenge China’s revisionist interpretations of history. Kumarajiva, once a bridge between cultures, is now a contested figure in the ongoing struggle over historical memory, religious authority, and geopolitical influence.