Demiéville, Paul. “Les sources chinoises.” In L’Inde classique: Manuel des études indiennes, Tome II, by Louis Renou and Jean Filliozat, 398-463. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale/Hanoi: École Française d’Extrême-Orient, 1953.
| Assertion | Argument | Place in source | Search |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Demiéville notes that this text was rediscovered at Dunhuang in 1907. [It was therefore only added to the canon with the publication of the Taishō.] |
446 |
Demieville notes that this text was rediscovered at Dunhuang in 1907. [It was therefore only added to the canon with the publication of the Taisho.] P 2116; T1556; 薩婆多宗五事論 |
|
Demiéville mentions in passing that the Shiqi di lun was extant in Xuanzang's time, and says that it was in order to study the original text that Xuanzang is supposed to have departed for India around 627. |
421 |
Demieville mentions in passing that the Shiqi di lun was extant in Xuanzang's time, and says that it was in order to study the original text that Xuanzang is supposed to have departed for India around 627. Shiqi di lun 十七地論 |
|
Demiéville lists and discusses texts ascribed to Kumārajīva by Sengyou, namely T201 T223 T227 T235 T245(!) T262 T366 T456 T475 T613 T614 T616 T617 T1435 T1509 T1564 T1568 T1569 T1646. This implies that the ascription of all other texts ascribed to Kumārajīva in the Taishō is less secure than those ascriptions, on at least this count. This entry lists all such texts (all "Kumārajīva" texts EXCEPT those listed by Demiéville/Sengyou). [NOTE: Demiéville's list is to be used with caution. For example, as Lin Xueni points out (personal communication), he omits the Kuśalamūlasaṃparigraha 華首經 T657, even though it is in fact listed by Sengyou, CSZJJ T2145 (LV) 10c21. I have therefore corrected, and do NOT include T657 in this list of possibly dubious ascriptions.] |
415-416 |
Demieville lists and discusses texts ascribed to Kumarajiva by Sengyou, namely T201 T223 T227 T235 T245(!) T262 T366 T456 T475 T613 T614 T616 T617 T1435 T1509 T1564 T1568 T1569 T1646. This implies that the ascription of all other texts ascribed to Kumarajiva in the Taisho is less secure than those ascriptions, on at least this count. This entry lists all such texts (all "Kumarajiva" texts EXCEPT those listed by Demieville/Sengyou). [NOTE: Demieville's list is to be used with caution. For example, as Lin Xueni points out (personal communication), he omits the Kusalamulasamparigraha 華首經 T657, even though it is in fact listed by Sengyou, CSZJJ T2145 (LV) 10c21. I have therefore corrected, and do NOT include T657 in this list of possibly dubious ascriptions.] T0035; 八徳經; 海八德經 T0123; Mizuno's "alternate *Ekottarikagama"; 佛說放牛經 T0208; 眾經撰雜譬喻 T0250; 摩訶般若波羅蜜大明呪經 T0286; 十住經 T0307; 佛說莊嚴菩提心經 T0335; *Sumatidarikapariprccha; 佛說須摩提菩薩經 T0366; 佛說阿彌陀經 T0382; *Sarvapunyasamuccayasamadhi-sutra; 集一切福德三昧經 T0389; 佛垂般涅槃略說教誡經 T0420; 自在王菩薩經 T0426; 佛說千佛因緣經 T0454; 佛說彌勒下生成佛經 T0456; 佛說彌勒大成佛經 T0464; 文殊師利問菩提經 T0482; 持世經 T0484; 不思議光菩薩所說經 T0586; 思益梵天所問經 T0615; 菩薩訶色欲法經 T0625; 大樹緊那羅王所問經 T0642; *Suramgamasamadhi-sutra; 佛說首楞嚴三昧經 T0650; 諸法無行經 T0653; 佛藏經 T0703; 燈指因緣經 T0988; *Mahamayuri-[vidyarajni]-sutra; 孔雀王呪經 T1436; 十誦比丘波羅提木叉戒本 T1484; 梵網經 T1489; 清淨毘尼方廣經 T1521; 十住毘婆沙論 T1659; 發菩提心經論 T310(17); 富樓那會 Purnapariprccha T310(26); 善臂菩薩會 Subahupariprccha |
|
Demiéville reports that these are the works ascribed to Kumārajīva by Sengyou, for which the ascriptions should therefore be more secure. [NOTE: As pointed out by Lin Xueni (personal communication), CSZJJ in fact ascribes to Kumārajīva at least one text not mentioned by Demiéville, viz. the Kuśalamūlasaṃparigraha 華首經 T657, T2145 (LV) 10c21. Demiéville's list is therefore to be used with caution. I have corrected to include T657 here --- MR] |
416-417 |
Demieville reports that these are the works ascribed to Kumarajiva by Sengyou, for which the ascriptions should therefore be more secure. [NOTE: As pointed out by Lin Xueni (personal communication), CSZJJ in fact ascribes to Kumarajiva at least one text not mentioned by Demieville, viz. the Kusalamulasamparigraha 華首經 T657, T2145 (LV) 10c21. Demieville's list is therefore to be used with caution. I have corrected to include T657 here --- MR] T0201; 大莊嚴論經 T0223; Fangguang banre boluomi jing 方廣般若波羅蜜經; 摩訶般若波羅蜜經 T0227; 小品般若波羅蜜經 T0235; 金剛般若波羅蜜經 T0245; 佛說仁王般若波羅蜜經 T0262; 妙法蓮華經 T0366; 佛說阿彌陀經 T0456; 佛說彌勒大成佛經 T0475; 維摩詰所說經 T0613; 禪祕要法經 T0614; 坐禪三昧經 T0616; 禪法要解 T0617; 思惟略要法 T0657; 佛說華手經; 華首經 T1435; 十誦律 T1509; 大智度論 T1564; 中論 T1568; 十二門論 T1569; 百論 T1646; 成實論 |
|
Demiéville reports that scholars have disagreed about the ascription of T361, some favouring Bo Yan 白延, and some Dharmarakṣa. Mochizuki favoured the ascription to Dharmarakṣa. |
414 |
Demieville reports that scholars have disagreed about the ascription of T361, some favouring Bo Yan 白延, and some Dharmaraksa. Mochizuki favoured the ascription to Dharmaraksa. T0361; 佛說無量清淨平等覺經 |
|
Demiéville states that beginning in the eighth century, some Chinese critics suspected this text of being an apocryphon. He does not give further details. |
436 |
Demieville states that beginning in the eighth century, some Chinese critics suspected this text of being an apocryphon. He does not give further details. T0377; 大般涅槃經後分 |
|
Demiéville reports that Huilin 慧琳 (737–820) composed the present Yiqie jing yin yi 一切經音義 T2128 in 100 fascicles around 800 CE. Demiéville characterises Huilin, who was from Kashgar, as a "good Sanskritist and Sinologist". Huilin's work incorporates an earlier glossary of the same title by Xuanying 玄應 (d.u.), a disciple of Xuanzang, whom Demiéville also describes as a good scholar. |
457 |
Demieville reports that Huilin 慧琳 (737–820) composed the present Yiqie jing yin yi 一切經音義 T2128 in 100 fascicles around 800 CE. Demieville characterises Huilin, who was from Kashgar, as a "good Sanskritist and Sinologist". Huilin's work incorporates an earlier glossary of the same title by Xuanying 玄應 (d.u.), a disciple of Xuanzang, whom Demieville also describes as a good scholar. Huilin, 慧琳 Xuanying 玄應 T2128; 一切經音義 |