|
|
Strickmann characterises T2906 as a "Chinese Buddhist scripture" [almost certainly meaning by this that the text was composed in China]. He discusses the content of the text in some detail.
Edit
|
163-166 |
Strickmann characterises T2906 as a "Chinese Buddhist scripture" [almost certainly meaning by this that the text was composed in China]. He discusses the content of the text in some detail. Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 T2906; 三萬佛同根本神祕之印並法龍種上尊王佛法 |
|
|
Strickmann (or Faure, his posthumous editor) writes that T1336 is "one of the three great collections of dhāraṇīs compiled during the Six Dynaties period" (the others being T1332 and T1331).
Edit
|
312 n. 39 |
Strickmann (or Faure, his posthumous editor) writes that T1336 is "one of the three great collections of dharanis compiled during the Six Dynaties period" (the others being T1332 and T1331). T1331; 佛說灌頂經 T1332; 七佛八菩薩所說大陀羅尼神呪經 T1336; 陀羅尼雜集 |
|
|
Strickmann characterises T1420 by saying that it "seems to have been written in North China during the sixth century." He notes that the text "appears to survive in only a single manuscript copy, made in Japan probably in the eleventh or twelfth century and preserved there in a monastic archive." Strickmannn discusses the content of the text in some detail. He notes that the text includes a passage in which "the chief concern of [a group of] converted brahmans is with the writing of talismans---and talismans of a familiar Chinese sort". He also notes the presence in the text of the twelve hours of the Chinese day.
A note added by the editors [probably Faure], 321 n. 76, gives several references on this text, including Osabe Kazuo, Tō Sō mikkyōshi zakkō 唐宋密教史雑考 (Kyoto: Nagata bunshodō, 1982): 234-247.
Edit
|
170-178 |
Strickmann characterises T1420 by saying that it "seems to have been written in North China during the sixth century." He notes that the text "appears to survive in only a single manuscript copy, made in Japan probably in the eleventh or twelfth century and preserved there in a monastic archive." Strickmannn discusses the content of the text in some detail. He notes that the text includes a passage in which "the chief concern of [a group of] converted brahmans is with the writing of talismans---and talismans of a familiar Chinese sort". He also notes the presence in the text of the twelve hours of the Chinese day.
A note added by the editors [probably Faure], 321 n. 76, gives several references on this text, including Osabe Kazuo, To So mikkyoshi zakko 唐宋密教史雑考 (Kyoto: Nagata bunshodo, 1982): 234-247. Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 T1420; 龍樹五明論 |
|
|
Strickmann writes of T1227 as one of “three important texts of the Uccuṣma cult [that] were produced by a certain Ajitasena, who worked in the Turfan region of Chinese Central Asia in the first half of the eighth century”. He notes that "in the middle of this typically Indian collection...we discover instructions for manufacturing a therapeutic seal", implying that the text may not be entirely direct translation of Indic source material. He calls some of the wording of the text "the very words of the old Chinese jingle on the efficacy of such seals", and remarks, "it is thus impossible to believe that this otherwise so Indian-seeming text is as pure an export to China as might have been supposed. Like so many works even of the most extreme Tantric kind, it has signs of Chinese adaptation, if not of wholesale compilation in China".
Edit
|
157-158 |
Strickmann writes of T1227 as one of “three important texts of the Uccusma cult [that] were produced by a certain Ajitasena, who worked in the Turfan region of Chinese Central Asia in the first half of the eighth century”. He notes that "in the middle of this typically Indian collection...we discover instructions for manufacturing a therapeutic seal", implying that the text may not be entirely direct translation of Indic source material. He calls some of the wording of the text "the very words of the old Chinese jingle on the efficacy of such seals", and remarks, "it is thus impossible to believe that this otherwise so Indian-seeming text is as pure an export to China as might have been supposed. Like so many works even of the most extreme Tantric kind, it has signs of Chinese adaptation, if not of wholesale compilation in China". Ajitasena, 阿質達霰 T1227; 大威力烏樞瑟摩明王經 |
|
|
As Strickmann notes, T1268 is supposed to have been translated by Bodhiruci 菩提流支 (of the Tang/Zhou). However, he also notes that the text contains "a puzzling addition, relating how the text was originally translated by a brahman from Central India at the end of the sixth century, and informing us that a variant form of the image comprises one elephant's head and one pig's head". 陳隋之間。中天竺婆羅門為譯此本。是依朝人從西國將來。各行用多不同驅自。又一本是陀羅尼集經諸天部卷出。若作佛部及菩薩部。一為猪頭象頭二身各自胡跪。形本各別同此行用, T1268 (XXII) 302a12-16.
Edit
|
254 |
As Strickmann notes, T1268 is supposed to have been translated by Bodhiruci 菩提流支 (of the Tang/Zhou). However, he also notes that the text contains "a puzzling addition, relating how the text was originally translated by a brahman from Central India at the end of the sixth century, and informing us that a variant form of the image comprises one elephant's head and one pig's head". 陳隋之間。中天竺婆羅門為譯此本。是依朝人從西國將來。各行用多不同驅自。又一本是陀羅尼集經諸天部卷出。若作佛部及菩薩部。一為猪頭象頭二身各自胡跪。形本各別同此行用, T1268 (XXII) 302a12-16. T1268; 大使呪法經 |
|
|
Strickmann discusses and summarises content of T396/T2874, characterising it as an "original Chinese Buddhist scripture...that came into being...early in the fifth century".
Edit
|
59-61 |
Strickmann discusses and summarises content of T396/T2874, characterising it as an "original Chinese Buddhist scripture...that came into being...early in the fifth century". T0396; 佛說法滅盡經 T2874; 小法滅盡經 |
|
|
Strickmann briefly mentions T2897 in connection with the "cult of the book", characterising it as a "seventh- or eighth-century Chinese Buddhist creation".
Edit
|
98 |
Strickmann briefly mentions T2897 in connection with the "cult of the book", characterising it as a "seventh- or eighth-century Chinese Buddhist creation". T2897; 天地八陽神咒經 |
|
|
Strickmann discusses a "classic Chinese incantation" appearing in T1336, which he characterises as "a bulky Chinese anthology of dhāraṇīs compiled in the first half of the sixth century".
Edit
|
106-107 |
Strickmann discusses a "classic Chinese incantation" appearing in T1336, which he characterises as "a bulky Chinese anthology of dharanis compiled in the first half of the sixth century". T1336; 陀羅尼雜集 |
|
|
Striickmann mentions T2904 as an example of the appearance in the context of a Buddhist text of a "basic Chinese incantatory pattern....a litany, droning and repetitive, [that] takes the form of successive lines, each running 'noun-noun-verb-me'".
Edit
|
107-108 |
Striickmann mentions T2904 as an example of the appearance in the context of a Buddhist text of a "basic Chinese incantatory pattern....a litany, droning and repetitive, [that] takes the form of successive lines, each running 'noun-noun-verb-me'". T2904; Qi qian Fo shen fu jing 七千佛神符經 |
|
|
Strickmann discusses T1393, characterising it as a work that "was either translated into or written directly in Chinese at the end of the fourth century". He gives quite a detailed summary of the contents of the text.
Edit
|
109-113 |
Strickmann discusses T1393, characterising it as a work that "was either translated into or written directly in Chinese at the end of the fourth century". He gives quite a detailed summary of the contents of the text. T1393; 佛說摩尼羅亶經 |
|
|
Strickmann characterises T1331(8) as a "reworking of" T1393. He regards Huijian as the known author, saying that Huijian "appears to have been a specialist in expanding older works, often genuine translations, and adapting them to the conditions of his time and the needs of the community that he aimed to establish". He discusses the content of T1331(8) in some detail, 114-119.
Edit
|
114-119 |
Strickmann characterises T1331(8) as a "reworking of" T1393. He regards Huijian as the known author, saying that Huijian "appears to have been a specialist in expanding older works, often genuine translations, and adapting them to the conditions of his time and the needs of the community that he aimed to establish". He discusses the content of T1331(8) in some detail, 114-119. Huijian, 慧簡, 惠簡 T1331(8); Guanding moniluotan da shenzhou jing 灌頂摩尼羅亶大神呪經 |
|
|
Strickmann discusses the final section of T620, characterising the text as a whole as "a manual on [meditation sickness] written in fifth-century China".
Edit
|
120-122 |
Strickmann discusses the final section of T620, characterising the text as a whole as "a manual on [meditation sickness] written in fifth-century China". T0620; 治禪病祕要法 |
|
|
Strickmann discusses T1331(7), saying that T1331 as a whole was "compiled in the 450s". He gives an extensive summary and discussion of the content of the text.
Edit
|
132-140 |
Strickmann discusses T1331(7), saying that T1331 as a whole was "compiled in the 450s". He gives an extensive summary and discussion of the content of the text. T1331(7); Guanding fu mo feng yin da shenzhou jing 灌頂伏魔封印大神呪經 |
|
|
Strickmann dates T1238 to the first half of the sixth century, but says of the nature of the text only that "a further set of instructions for therapeutic sealing was written down in another proto-Tantric scripture"; he thus seems to suspend judgement about whether the text is a translation from an Indic source, or a Chinese composition.
Later, however, he seems to be less certain of the date. "If the text can truly be dated to the first half of the sixth century....Unfortunately, though there seems to be no intrinsic improbability in this early date, the work has not survived in any continental Chinese Buddhist canon. It is known only from Japan (whither it is supposed to have been imported in the ninth century), and the printing on which the current edition is based dates only from 1753" (151).
Edit
|
143-151 |
Strickmann dates T1238 to the first half of the sixth century, but says of the nature of the text only that "a further set of instructions for therapeutic sealing was written down in another proto-Tantric scripture"; he thus seems to suspend judgement about whether the text is a translation from an Indic source, or a Chinese composition.
Later, however, he seems to be less certain of the date. "If the text can truly be dated to the first half of the sixth century....Unfortunately, though there seems to be no intrinsic improbability in this early date, the work has not survived in any continental Chinese Buddhist canon. It is known only from Japan (whither it is supposed to have been imported in the ninth century), and the printing on which the current edition is based dates only from 1753" (151). T1238; Dharani Book of Atavaka General of the Demons; 阿吒婆𤘽鬼神大將上佛陀羅尼經 |
|
|
Strickmann writes that T1265 "is said to have been translated by a monk named Gupta, who was apparently active in China during the 650s, but (like many other Tantric and proto-Tantric ritual texts) it is extant only in a single manuscript copied in 1152 and preserved in a Japanese monastic library." Strickmann gives a fairly detailed discussion of the content of the text. He seems to remain agnostic about the question of whether the text is a translation or a Chinese composition, though he does state that the text of a talisman is "clearly a Chinese adaptation of the goddess's Sanskrit spell" (153). On the date, he writes, "If this text indeed dates from the middle of the seventh century, it may also rank among the earliest explicit references to printing such curative seals on paper" (153).
Edit
|
151-156 |
Strickmann writes that T1265 "is said to have been translated by a monk named Gupta, who was apparently active in China during the 650s, but (like many other Tantric and proto-Tantric ritual texts) it is extant only in a single manuscript copied in 1152 and preserved in a Japanese monastic library." Strickmann gives a fairly detailed discussion of the content of the text. He seems to remain agnostic about the question of whether the text is a translation or a Chinese composition, though he does state that the text of a talisman is "clearly a Chinese adaptation of the goddess's Sanskrit spell" (153). On the date, he writes, "If this text indeed dates from the middle of the seventh century, it may also rank among the earliest explicit references to printing such curative seals on paper" (153). T1265; 佛說常瞿利毒女陀羅尼呪經; The Book of the Incantations and Dharani of the Janguli Woman, The Seal of the Jungle-Woman |
|
|
Strickmann writes: "Properly speaking, many of [Amoghavajra's 167 'translations'] were not translations at all. Instead, they might better be called 'adaptations’; essentially, he refurbished them in line with his own terminology and ritual practice. This becomes even more striking in those cases where texts 'translated' by Amoghavajra are known to have been written in China centuries earlier, and directly in Chinese. A substantial part of Amoghavajra’s output thus comprises revisions of books already known in China, rather than new materials. Among the remaining, a good many cannot be found either in corresponding Sanskrit manuscripts or in Tibetan translation – at least not in the form in which Amoghavajra presents them. Much of what his texts tell us unquestionably goes back to Indian sources; he was clearly working fully within the Tantric Buddhist tradition, but often more as an author or compiler than as a translator in our sense of the term."
Edit
|
229 |
Strickmann writes: "Properly speaking, many of [Amoghavajra's 167 'translations'] were not translations at all. Instead, they might better be called 'adaptations’; essentially, he refurbished them in line with his own terminology and ritual practice. This becomes even more striking in those cases where texts 'translated' by Amoghavajra are known to have been written in China centuries earlier, and directly in Chinese. A substantial part of Amoghavajra’s output thus comprises revisions of books already known in China, rather than new materials. Among the remaining, a good many cannot be found either in corresponding Sanskrit manuscripts or in Tibetan translation – at least not in the form in which Amoghavajra presents them. Much of what his texts tell us unquestionably goes back to Indian sources; he was clearly working fully within the Tantric Buddhist tradition, but often more as an author or compiler than as a translator in our sense of the term." T0243; 大樂金剛不空真實三麼耶經 T0246; 仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經 T0297; 普賢菩薩行願讚 T0319; 大聖文殊師利菩薩佛剎功德莊嚴經 T0326; 佛說三十五佛名禮懺文 T0404; 大集大虛空藏菩薩所問經 T0413; 百千頌大集經地藏菩薩請問法身讚 T0469; 文殊問經字母品第十四 T0524; 佛為優填王說王法政論經 T0667; 大方廣如來藏經 T0682; 大乘密嚴經 T0710; 慈氏菩薩所說大乘緣生稻𦼮喻經 T0789; 金剛頂瑜伽念珠經 T0856; 大毘盧遮那成佛神變加持經略示七支念誦隨行法 T0857; 大日經略攝念誦隨行法 T0861; 毘盧遮那五字真言修習儀軌 T0865; 金剛頂一切如來真實攝大乘現證大教王經 T0869; 金剛頂經瑜伽十八會指歸 T0870; 略述金剛頂瑜伽分別聖位修證法門 T0871; 金剛頂瑜伽略述三十七尊心要 T0872; 金剛頂瑜伽三十七尊出生義 T0873; 金剛頂蓮華部心念誦儀軌 T0874; 金剛頂一切如來真實攝大乘現證大教王經 T0878; 金剛頂經金剛界大道場毘盧遮那如來自受用身內證智眷屬法身異名佛最上乘祕密三摩地禮懺文 T0879; 金剛頂瑜伽三十七尊禮 T0880; 瑜伽金剛頂經釋字母品 T0897; 蕤呬耶經 T0902; 總釋陀羅尼義讚 T0903; 都部陀羅尼目 T0908; 金剛頂瑜伽護摩儀軌 T0909; 金剛頂瑜伽護摩儀軌 T0915; 受菩提心戒儀 T0921; 阿閦如來念誦供養法 T0924A; 藥師如來念誦儀軌 T0924B; 藥師如來念誦儀軌 T0930; 無量壽如來觀行供養儀軌 T0931; 金剛頂經觀自在王如來修行法 T0933; 九品往生阿彌陀三摩地集陀羅尼經 T0944A; 大佛頂如來放光悉怛多鉢怛囉陀羅尼 T0948; 金輪王佛頂要略念誦法 T0950; 菩提場所說一字頂輪王經 T0953; 一字奇特佛頂經 T0954A; 一字頂輪王念誦儀軌 T0955; 一字頂輪王瑜伽觀行儀軌 T0957; 金剛頂一字頂輪王瑜伽一切時處念誦成佛儀軌 T0958; 金剛頂經一字頂輪王儀軌音義 T0961; 如意寶珠轉輪祕密現身成佛金輪呪王經 T0962; 寶悉地成佛陀羅尼經 T0963; 佛說熾盛光大威德消災吉祥陀羅尼經 T0972; 佛頂尊勝陀羅尼念誦儀軌法 T0974D; 佛頂尊勝陀羅尼注義 T0982; 佛母大孔雀明王經 T0983A; 佛說大孔雀明王畫像壇場儀軌 T0989; 大雲輪請雨經 T0990; 大雲經祈雨壇法 T0994; 仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經陀羅尼念誦儀軌 T0995; 仁王般若念誦法 T0996; 仁王般若陀羅尼釋 T1000; 成就妙法蓮華經王瑜伽觀智儀軌 T1001; 法華曼荼羅威儀形色法經 T1002; 不空羂索毘盧遮那佛大灌頂光真言 T1003; 大樂金剛不空真實三昧耶經般若波羅蜜多理趣釋 T1004; 般若波羅蜜多理趣經大樂不空三昧真實金剛薩埵菩薩等一十七聖大曼荼羅義述 T1005A; 大寶廣博樓閣善住祕密陀羅尼經 T1008; 菩提場莊嚴陀羅尼經 T1009; 出生無邊門陀羅尼經 T1010; 佛說出生無邊門陀羅尼儀軌 T1019; 大方廣佛華嚴經入法界品四十二字觀門 T1020; 大方廣佛花嚴經入法界品頓證毘盧遮那法身字輪瑜伽儀軌 T1022A; 一切如來心祕密全身舍利寶篋印陀羅尼經 T1022B; 一切如來心祕密全身舍利寶篋印陀羅尼經 T1030; 觀自在大悲成就瑜伽蓮華部念誦法門 T1031; 聖觀自在菩薩心真言瑜伽觀行儀軌 T1032; 瑜伽蓮華部念誦法 T1033; 金剛恐怖集會方廣軌儀觀自在菩薩三世最勝心明王經 T1037; 觀自在菩薩說普賢陀羅尼經 T1039; 阿唎多羅陀羅尼阿嚕力經 T1040; 金剛頂降三世大儀軌法王教中觀自在菩薩心真言一切如來蓮華大曼荼羅品 T1041; 觀自在菩薩心真言一印念誦法 T1042; 觀自在菩薩大悲智印周遍法界利益眾生薰真如法 T1056; 金剛頂瑜伽千手千眼觀自在菩薩修行儀軌經 T1064; 千手千眼觀世音菩薩大悲心陀羅尼 T1066; 大悲心陀羅尼修行念誦略儀 T1067; 攝無礙大悲心大陀羅尼經計一法中出無量義南方滿願補陀落海會五部諸尊等弘誓力方位及威儀形色執持三摩耶幖幟曼荼羅儀軌 T1069; 十一面觀自在菩薩心密言念誦儀軌經 T1072A; 聖賀野紇哩縛大威怒王立成大神驗供養念誦儀軌法品 T1076; 七俱胝佛母所說准提陀羅尼經 T1085; 觀自在菩薩如意輪念誦儀軌 T1086; 觀自在菩薩如意輪瑜伽 T1091; 七星如意輪祕密要經 T1100; 葉衣觀自在菩薩經 T1101; 佛說大方廣曼殊室利經 T1102; 金剛頂經多羅菩薩念誦法 T1110; 佛說一髻尊陀羅尼經 T1111; 青頸觀自在菩薩心陀羅尼經 T1113B; 大慈大悲救苦觀世音自在王菩薩廣大圓滿無礙自在青頸大悲心陀羅尼 T1119; 大樂金剛薩埵修行成就儀軌 T1120A; 金剛頂勝初瑜伽經中略出大樂金剛薩埵念誦儀 T1122; 金剛頂瑜伽他化自在天理趣會普賢修行念誦儀軌 T1123; 金剛頂勝初瑜伽普賢菩薩念誦法 T1124; 普賢金剛薩埵略瑜伽念誦儀軌 T1125; 金剛頂瑜伽金剛薩埵五祕密修行念誦儀軌 T1132; 金剛王菩薩祕密念誦儀軌 T1133; 金剛壽命陀羅尼念誦法 T1134A; 金剛壽命陀羅尼經法 T1134B; 金剛壽命陀羅尼經 T1135; 佛說一切如來金剛壽命陀羅尼經 T1136; 佛說一切諸如來心光明加持普賢菩薩延命金剛最勝陀羅尼經 T1146; 大虛空藏菩薩念誦法 T1150; 轉法輪菩薩摧魔怨敵法 T1151; 修習般若波羅蜜菩薩觀行念誦儀軌 T1153; 普遍光明清淨熾盛如意寶印心無能勝大明王大隨求陀羅尼經 T1155; 金剛頂瑜伽最勝祕密成佛隨求即得神變加持成就陀羅尼儀軌 T1163; 佛說雨寶陀羅尼經 T1167; 八大菩薩曼荼羅經 T1171; 金剛頂經瑜伽文殊師利菩薩法 T1172; 金剛頂超勝三界經說文殊五字真言勝相 T1174; 五字陀羅尼頌 T1175; 金剛頂經瑜伽文殊師利菩薩供養儀軌 T1176; 曼殊室利童子菩薩五字瑜伽法 T1177A; 大乘瑜伽金剛性海曼殊室利千臂千鉢大教王經 T1195; 大聖文殊師利菩薩讚佛法身禮 T1199; 金剛手光明灌頂經最勝立印聖無動尊大威怒王念誦儀軌法品 T1200; 底哩三昧耶不動尊威怒王使者念誦法 T1201; 底哩三昧耶不動尊聖者念誦祕密法 T1209; 金剛頂瑜伽降三世成就極深密門 T1210; 降三世忿怒明王念誦儀軌 T1211; 甘露軍荼利菩薩供養念誦成就儀軌 T1214; 聖閻曼德迦威怒王立成大神驗念誦法 T1222; 聖迦柅忿怒金剛童子菩薩成就儀軌經 T1225; 大威怒烏芻澁麼儀軌經 T1244; 毘沙門天王經 T1247; 北方毘沙門天王隨軍護法儀軌 T1248; 北方毘沙門天王隨軍護法真言 T1249; 毘沙門儀軌 T1250; 北方毘沙門多聞寶藏天王神妙陀羅尼別行儀軌 T1252; 佛說大吉祥天女十二名號經 T1253; 大吉祥天女十二契一百八名無垢大乘經 T1254; 末利支提婆華鬘經 T1255; 佛說摩利支天經; 佛說摩利支天菩薩陀羅尼經 T1258; 摩利支菩薩略念誦法 T1260; 大藥叉女歡喜母并愛子成就法 T1261; 訶利帝母真言經 T1263; 氷揭羅天童子經 T1264; 觀自在菩薩化身蘘麌哩曳童女銷伏毒害陀羅尼經; 佛說穰麌梨童女經 T1266; 大聖天歡喜雙身毘那夜迦法 T1271; 摩訶毘盧遮那如來定惠均等入三昧耶身雙身大聖歡喜天菩薩修行祕密法儀軌 T1276; 文殊師利菩薩根本大教王經金翅鳥王品 T1277; 速疾立驗魔醯首羅天說阿尾奢法 T1289; 佛說金毘羅童子威德經 T1291; 深沙大將儀軌 T1297; 供養十二大威德天報恩品 T1299; 文殊師利菩薩及諸仙所說吉凶時日善惡宿曜經 T1306; 北斗七星護摩祕要儀軌 T1313; 佛說救拔焰口餓鬼陀羅尼經 T1315; 施諸餓鬼飲食及水法 T1318; 瑜伽集要救阿難陀羅尼焰口軌儀經 T1319; 瑜伽集要焰口施食起教阿難陀緣由 T1323; 除一切疾病陀羅尼經 T1324; 能淨一切眼疾病陀羅尼經 T1653; 大乘緣生論 T1665; 金剛頂瑜伽中發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心論 |