Karashima, Seishi. "Who Composed the Mahāyāna Scriptures? The Mahāsāṃghikas and Vaitulya Scriptures." ARIRIAB XVIII (2015): 113-162.
| Assertion | Argument | Place in source | Search |
|---|---|---|---|
|
As part of an argument that genre identifiers in titles shifted over time from vaitulya to vaipulya, Karashima notes that KYL gives an alternate title for Dharmarakṣa's Lalitavistara T186 of Fangdeng yuanqi 方等本起, and reconstructs this title *Vaitulya-nidāna. He also notes that the text gives an internal title for itself of 普曜大方等典 (493c24), which he reconstructs *Lalitavistara-mahāvaitulya-dharmaparyāya. |
123 |
As part of an argument that genre identifiers in titles shifted over time from vaitulya to vaipulya, Karashima notes that KYL gives an alternate title for Dharmaraksa's Lalitavistara T186 of Fangdeng yuanqi 方等本起, and reconstructs this title *Vaitulya-nidana. He also notes that the text gives an internal title for itself of 普曜大方等典 (493c24), which he reconstructs *Lalitavistara-mahavaitulya-dharmaparyaya. T0186; 普曜大方等典; *Vaitulya-nidana; Fangdeng yuanqi 方等本起; *Lalitavistara-mahavaitulya-dharmaparyaya; 普曜經 |
|
As part of an argument that genre identifiers in titles shifted over time from vaitulya to vaipulya (and beyond, to *mahāyānasūtra, etc.), Karashima cites the evidence of several internal titles or self-references given to SP in Dhr's T263 (Karashima also gives equivalents in Skt manuscripts): 《正法華》方等, Saddharmapuṇḍarīkaṃ nāma dharmaparyāyaṃ; He also notes that Sengyou's CSZJJ refers to the text by the title 方等正法華經. |
123-125 |
As part of an argument that genre identifiers in titles shifted over time from vaitulya to vaipulya (and beyond, to *mahayanasutra, etc.), Karashima cites the evidence of several internal titles or self-references given to SP in Dhr's T263 (Karashima also gives equivalents in Skt manuscripts): 《正法華》方等, Saddharmapundarikam nama dharmaparyayam; 《法華方等正經》, Sad° dharmaparyaya~ sutranta~ mahavaipulya~/ Sad° dharma° sutra~ mahavaitulya~; 《正法華方等經典》, Sad° nama dharma° sutranta~ mahavaipulya~; Sad° nama dharma° sutra~ mahavaitulya~; 《正法華經》方等典詔, Sad° nama dharma° sutranta~ mahavaipulya~/Sad° nama dharma° sutra~ mahavaipulya~ 斯《正法華》... 大方等經, Sad° vaipulyasutra~/vaitupulyasutra~ He also notes that Sengyou's CSZJJ refers to the text by the title 方等正法華經. T0263; 正法華方等; 正法華方等經典; 法華方等正經; 正法華經方等典詔; 正法華經 |
|
As part of an argument that genre identifiers in titles shifted over time from vaitulya to vaipulya, Karashima points out that T266 gives an internal title for itself of 不退轉輪方等之法 (226a3), which he reconstructs as *Avaivartikacakra-vaitulya-dharmaparyāya. |
122 |
As part of an argument that genre identifiers in titles shifted over time from vaitulya to vaipulya, Karashima points out that T266 gives an internal title for itself of 不退轉輪方等之法 (226a3), which he reconstructs as *Avaivartikacakra-vaitulya-dharmaparyaya. T0266; 佛說阿惟越致遮經; *Avaivartikacakra-vaitulya-dharmaparyaya |
|
As part of an argument for a shift in genre titles over time from vaitulya to vaipulya, Karashima tentatively reconstructs the title of T274 as *Sarvavaitulyasaṃgraha-dharmaparyāya. |
120 |
As part of an argument for a shift in genre titles over time from vaitulya to vaipulya, Karashima tentatively reconstructs the title of T274 as *Sarvavaitulyasamgraha-dharmaparyaya. T0274; 佛說濟諸方等學經; *Sarvavaitulyasamgraha-dharmaparyaya? |
|
As part of a larger discussion of the history of genre identifiers (*vevulla, vaipulya, mahāyānasūtra etc.) in Mahāyāna scripturs, Karashima reconstructs the title of T350 as *vevulla-Maṇiratna-dharmaparyāya. At 118 n.15, he notes in support of this interpretation an instance of 摩訶惟曰羅 in Lokakṣema's T224, where Karashima reconstructs Gāndhārī *Maha-vevula < *Mahāvevulla < BHS Mahā-vaipulya. |
117, 118 n. 15 |
As part of a larger discussion of the history of genre identifiers (*vevulla, vaipulya, mahayanasutra etc.) in Mahayana scripturs, Karashima reconstructs the title of T350 as *vevulla-Maniratna-dharmaparyaya. At 118 n.15, he notes in support of this interpretation an instance of 摩訶惟曰羅 in Lokaksema's T224, where Karashima reconstructs Gandhari *Maha-vevula < *Mahavevulla < BHS Maha-vaipulya. T0350; 遺曰羅摩尼寶經; *[Buddhabhasita]Vaipulyaratnakuta-sutra; *[Buddhabhasita]Vaipulyamaniratna-sutra; *vevulla-Maniratna-dharmaparyaya; 寶積經; 佛說遺日摩尼寶經 |
|
Karashima writes, "Though further investigation is needed to determine its attribution, I assume that this translation was made by Lokakṣema or his group, because the vocabulary and style in this translation agree very well with his translations, especially the usage of 謂 (“says to [somebody]”) and 用～故(“because”). Karashima further reconstructs the title 遺曰(←日)寶積三昧文殊師利問法身經 as *Vevulla-Ratnakoṭisamādhi-Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-dharmadhātu-dharmaparyāya or -sūtra. The element 遺曰 is not found in the title in the version of the sūtra presented in T, but Karashima bases his conclusion that this title was original on Sengyou's CSZJJ: 寶積三昧文殊師利菩薩問法身經一卷(或云遺日寶積三昧文殊師利問法身經), T2145 (LV) 30b20-21. |
119 |
Karashima writes, "Though further investigation is needed to determine its attribution, I assume that this translation was made by Lokaksema or his group, because the vocabulary and style in this translation agree very well with his translations, especially the usage of 謂 (“says to [somebody]”) and 用~故(“because”). Karashima further reconstructs the title 遺曰(←日)寶積三昧文殊師利問法身經 as *Vevulla-Ratnakotisamadhi-Manjusripariprccha-dharmadhatu-dharmaparyaya or -sutra. The element 遺曰 is not found in the title in the version of the sutra presented in T, but Karashima bases his conclusion that this title was original on Sengyou's CSZJJ: 寶積三昧文殊師利菩薩問法身經一卷(或云遺日寶積三昧文殊師利問法身經), T2145 (LV) 30b20-21. *Lokaksema, 支婁迦讖 T0356; *Vevulla-Ratnakotisamadhi-Manjusripariprccha-dharmadhatu-dharmaparyaya/-sutra.; Weiri [ > Weiyue] baoji sanmei wenshushili wen fashen jing 遺日寶積三昧文殊師利問法身經; Weiri [> Weiyue] baoji sanmei Wenshushili wen fasheng jing 遺日寶積三昧文殊師利問法身經; 佛說寶積三昧文殊師利菩薩問法身經 |
|
As part of a detailed study attempting to demonstrate that genre identifiers in titles of Mahāyāna scriptures shifted over time *vevulla/*veulla > vaitulya > vaipulya > mahāyānasūtra (etc.), Karashima proposes that the title of 大方等大集經 T397 originally represented *Mahāvaitulya-Mahāsannipāta, and identified the work as a "collection of vaitulya-scriptures". |
138 |
As part of a detailed study attempting to demonstrate that genre identifiers in titles of Mahayana scriptures shifted over time *vevulla/*veulla > vaitulya > vaipulya > mahayanasutra (etc.), Karashima proposes that the title of 大方等大集經 T397 originally represented *Mahavaitulya-Mahasannipata, and identified the work as a "collection of vaitulya-scriptures". T0397; 大方等大集經 |