Source: Shi Tianchang 1998

Shi Tianchang studies the history of Kang Senghui's collection of jātaka tales, which he treats under the title Liu du ji 六度集. This article is a summary of a more extended MA thesis. The overall thrust of his study is to argue that a number of the texts included in the connection were probably not part of a presumptive underlying Indic Vorlage to the text; he holds that several may well have been added by Kang Senghui himself at the moment of composition, and that some others may have been added later. Thus, for Tianchang, the present T152 is a synthetic product that emerged over the course of a complex history.

The collection is generally heterogeneous, in a manner that may lead us to suspect a chequered history. For example, the collection seems to have a standard opening and closing formula for its tales (昔者菩薩/昔者 ... 菩薩慈惠度無極行布施如是 [e.g. for dānapāramitā, varied for other "perfections"]). However, these formulae do not always appear. Twelve texts have rather a standard sūtra nidāna; eight have standard sūtra endings [some of these phrases have peculiar patterns of distribution that may reward closer investigation, e.g. 為佛作禮而去, 諸沙門聞經 – MR]. Only thirty texts bear individual titles. Although these titles often have –jing 經 in them, there is no necessary connection between such titles and a recognisable "sūtra" format. Later catalogues record approx. 24 titles as separate, individual texts, all in one juan, and usually stating that they are anonymous works. In such cases, we must consider whether the texts originated as offshoots of T152 (e.g. as chao 抄), or whether originally independent texts were later added to the collection that became T152.

The bulk of the study comprises treatments of individual texts within the Liu du ji or T152, which are of interest from various perspectives.

The Zhong xin zheng xing jing 忠心正行經 is reported in various traditional catalogues as taken from the Liu du ji, even though it is not found in the present T152. Tianchang ultimately argues that it is not possible to determine whether or not this text was part of the original Liu du ji, because we have no evidence about its content. See separate entry for details.

Tianchang argues that the Sixing jing 四姓經 T152(16) appears originally to have formed a single whole with the following, untitled T152(17). T152(17) ends with a sūtra ending formula, and an identification of 四姓 with the Buddha. The protagonist 四姓 (which Tianchang argues at some length, 81 n. 30, designates a social role rather than a proper name, *velama) features in "both" texts, and the two together thus form a single coherent narrative. Only one text appears in catalogues that might be associated with this text (in relation to velama; there are no records that can be connected with 四姓). Tianchang lists a rather rich set of parallels in Pāli and Chinese for the story of the Brahmin velama, 81 n. 31. The text seems anomalous, in that it is included in the section of the text on the perfection of giving, but ultimately does not make that perfection supreme. It also has an irregular opening and setting, and in other formulaic features does not fit with the typical features of the Liu du ji. The text features some promotion of the virtue of filial piety, which Tianchang holds is in keeping with concerns displayed by Kang Senghui elsewhere. Tianchang speculates, on this basis, that the text (presumably meaning T152(16-17) as a unit) was not in the Indic source text(s) for the Liu du ji, but was added by Kang Senghui himself.

The Taizi mupo jing 太子墓魄經 T152(38) is the subject of conflicting reports in the catalogues. The text has the form of a full sūtra, complete with an opening nidāna and stereotypical closing section. Tianchang holds that this format does not fit with the basic design and character of the Liu du ji, and that the texts was therefore probably not included in Kang Senghui's Indic source text. In the Jing lü yi xiang and CSZJJ, no mention is made of the text being from the Liu du ji. Tianchang thus proposes that it may well have been added to the collection sometime between Sengyou and Fajing.

The title Milan jing 彌蘭經 (cf. T152(39)) is already found in Dao'an, who characterises the text as old; in CSZJJ, it is already explicitly treated as from the Liu du ji. It is excerpted in the Jing lü yi xiang. At least from the time of CSZJJ, this title is identified with the Milian jing 彌連經/彌蓮經. However, Tianchang compares the Milian jing as quoted in the Jing lü yi xiang with T152(39), and argues that the differences in wording are too great for them to represent the same text; they are, rather, two independent versions of the same material. Tianchang refers to a study by Itō Chikako of eight versions of the same narrative material; according to his summary, she treats material common to all versions, and concludes that T152(39) represents the version closest to the oldest form of the story accessible. Tianchang concludes that there are certain elements of the style that suggest the text is close to Kang Senghui, or even his work; it is at least quite old. At the same time, he holds, again, that the independent sūtra format makes it difficult to see how it could fit into the overall plan of the Liu du ji, so long as the collection is united by any coherent design whatsoever. He thus concludes that it is most likely that the text did not belong to the Indic original behind the Liu du ji, and that it should have been added into the collection before Sengyou at the latest.

The Puming wang jing 普明王經 T152(41) relates a past life of Aṅgulimāla. Dao'an lists the title among anonymous texts. Neither Dao'an nor Sengyou given any further information. Fajing treats the text as a chao from the Liu du ji. From LDSBJ, the text is ascribed to Juqu Jingsheng. This ascription was overturned by Zhisheng in KYL. The text sports the very unusual feature of four-character rhyming verse. Virtually identical verses are found in the Wunao zhiman pin 無惱指鬘品 T202(52) 426b21-c2, and the Sūtra of Humane Kings T245 (VIII) 830b5-15. In other locations paralleling the narrative content of this text, however, the verses are different in purport: Tianchang cites Pāli Jātaka 537, T205(8) 504a18-19, and MPPU T1509 (XXV) 89a27-b1. Focusing in particular on the verbatim correspondence with T202(52), Tianchang argues that these verses do not display a typical Liangzhou style, and that the direction of borrowing should therefore be T152(41) to T202(52). The Sūtra of Humane Kings is of course a famous example of a Chinese composition, and Tianchang cites Mochizuki in support of the notion that there, too, the verses are taken from T152(41). T152(41) is excerpted in the Jing lü yi xiang, but without the verse; it is only in SYM that the source is given as the Liu du ji. Tianchang judges that the style generally matches Kang Senghui and the Liu du ji as a whole. He surmises, in conclusion, that it was probably part of the (Indic) original text, but that the sūtra opening may have been added to the text later.

The Mifeng wang jing 蜜蜂王經 T152(64) is listed among Dao'an's anonymous texts, and treated by Sengyou as taken from the Liu du ji. Fajing and bibliographers after him treat the text as a chao from the Liu du ji. This title does not appear in LDSBJ. Tianchang holds that the theme of the text fits the section in which it appears, on vīryapāramitā. However, the text takes the form of an independent sūtra, and the content centres on monks exchanging verses, which is atypical for the Liu du ji. Tianchang lists quite a number of relatively rare terms and items of phrasing he also holds atypical for Kang Senghui and the Liu du ji. He notes that many of these terms can be found in Dharmarakṣa. Tianchang's terms are: 阿惟越致, 不起法忍, 陀鄰尼 [sic: actually 陀隣尼], 不退轉地, 陰蓋, 般泥曰, 解諸法本, 善權方便, 當造光明智慧之本 [a peculiar choice—a hapax! – MR], 無央數人, 發無上平等度意. He focuses particularly on 般泥曰 and 發無上平等度意, which he says are particularly rare. He proposes that the only translator in whose works both these items are found is Dharmarakṣa: 般泥曰in several texts; 發無上平等度意 only in T334 [no single Dharmarakṣa work features both items – MR]. On this basis, Tianchang proposes that T152(64) is actually by Dharmarakṣa. [Note: Tianchang's methodology here is weak, since he only asks whether the terms in question are compatible with Dharmarakṣa, not whether they are exclusive to or distinctive of him; he also only considers the occurrence of each of his terms in isolation, without considering where they might cluster with particular density -- MR.]

Tianchang also treats the Jingmian wang jing 鏡面王經 T152(89). He first surveys evidence in the catalogues. He then notes the occurence of some terms in the text that he regards as more typical of Zhi Qian (e.g. 我曹, 子曹), and on this basis concludes that the text, which is also found at T198(5), was borrowed into T152 from T198, rather than the other way around. In this proposal, he conforms with the views of a number of other scholars.

In treating the texts found in the chapter on dhyānapāramitā, Tianchang notes, like prior scholars (e.g. Link, Zürcher) that T152(74) is actually the preface to the chapter, not a tale like those comprising the typical content of the Liu du ji. However, he demurs from predecessors like Link and Zürcher in holding that T152(75) and T152(76) and not part of this same preface. Tianchang argues that T152(74) and T152(75) share a common topic, namely, the control required for entry into dhyāna and the description of states ensuing upon its attainment. He aims to demonstrate this claim by listing a series of parallels in phrasing between the two. He holds that it would not make sense for such content to be repeated at such length in a single document like a preface, and therefore, that the common passages represent the author of the preface anticipating and echoing the content of the first proper text in the chapter. He then argues that T152(76), by contrast, is closely related to T152(77) and T152(78). No. 76 describes 26 thoughts that conduce to entry into dhyāna. Nos. 77 and 78 rehearse the narrative of the Prince Siddhartha making his excursions from the palace and seeing the "sights" of age, sickness, and death—whereupon he is depicted as returning to the palace and practicing dhyāna. In light of this grouping, Tianchang believes that No. 76 belongs with 77 and 78, and it is therefore inappropriate to treat it as part of the Introduction. By this process of elimination, he concludes that only T152(74) represents Kang Senghui's preface to the chapter.

However, Tianchang also concludes that T152(75) and T152(76) do not fit the general content and structure of the Liu du ji. Tianchang believes that the general mode of presentation of meditation here matches the content of An Shigao's texts, and is compatible with Kang Senghui's authorship, since Senghui is said to have continued Shigao's practices. They feature general instructions on meditation, and do not feature the deeds of Śākyamuni when he was a bodhisattva, or present the six perfections as bodhisattva practice. For Tianchang, these texts should therefore not have been part of any Indic Vorlage for the Liu du ji.

T152(77) presents episodes from Śākyamuni's "present" life like his excursions from the palace, and the episode in which he watches the ploughing; T152(78) presents his birth, marriage, and disillusion with the world. These texts therefore appear more at home in a Buddha biography. However, they also differ from more usual Buddha biographies in some details: the episodes are presented out of chronological order, and when the prince sees the "sights", he reacts by going back to the palace and meditating. These details lead Tianchang to conclude that T152(77) and T152(78) could not have been in an Indic source text for the Liu du ji, and might be Kang Senghui's original works.

Continuing the Buddha-biography theme, T152(79) presents Śākyamuni as a bodhisattva (in his last lifetime) achieving the three superknowledges through his meditative practice, and T152(80) presents the episode in which he was oblivious to a thunderstorm because he was absorbed in meditation. Tianchang holds that these texts, too, do not fit with the usual structure of the Liu du ji, and should not have been part of its Indic original text.

Tianchang also lays out striking matches in wording in passages treating the same episodes in T152(78) and Zhi Qian's Taizi ruiying benqi jing 太子瑞應本起經 T185; and, similarly, between T152(79) and the Yichu pusa benqi jing 異出菩薩本起經 T188 ascribed to Daozhen (98-99). On this basis, he proposes that in composing these texts, Kang Senghui consulted earlier works.

T152(81) presents a version of the Sadāprarudita story, better known from its occurrence in some members of the family of Prajñāpāramitā sūtras. Tianchang notes that this version of the story deviates in some details from the Prajñāpāramitā versions of the same story. In particular, other versions of the story do not present Sadāprarudita as a prior life of Śākyamuni. Tianchang also opines that the story, which he interprets as promoting or praising the perfection of wisdom, sits oddly in a section of the Liu du ji ostensibly devoted to the perfection of dhyāna. He notes further that this is the only example in all of T152 where we encounter the idea of a Mahāyāna bodhisattva. For all these reasons, he holds that it is unlikely that the text was part of any Indic Vorlage for the Liu du ji. He claims further that there are echoes of Kang Senghui's ideas, as attested in other texts, in this version of the story, and that the style is highly consonant with that of Kang Senghui. On this basis, he argues that it is very probable that the story was added to the collection by Senghui himself.

Tianchang argues rather briefly (100-101) that T152(82) has features that fit better with the promotion of the perfection of wisdom than with the perfection of dhyāna, and proposes that the collection may have been revised, at some point after its original production, to reassign the story to the dhyāna chapter, rather than the prajñā chapter immediately following.

Edit

Tianchang argues that the Sixing jing 四姓經 T152(16) appears originally to have formed a single whole with the following, untitled T152(17). T152(17) ends with a sūtra ending formula, and an identification of 四姓 with the Buddha. The protagonist 四姓 (which Tianchang argues at some length, 81 n. 30, is a social role rather than a proper name, *velama) features in "both" texts, and the two together thus form a single coherent narrative. Only one text appears in catalogues that might be associated with this text (in relation to velama; there are no records that can be connected with 四姓). Tianchang lists a rather rich set of parallels in Pāli and Chinese for the story of the Brahmin velama, 81 n. 31. The text seems anomalous, in that it is included in the section of the text on the perfection of giving, but ultimately does not make that perfection supreme. It also has an irregular opening and setting, and in other formulaic features does not fit with the typical features of the Liu du ji. The text features some promotion of the virtue of filial piety, which Tianchang holds is in keeping with concerns displayed by Kang Senghui elsewhere. Tianchang speculates, on this basis, that the text (presumably meaning T152(16-17) as a unit) was not in the Indic source text(s) for the Liu du ji, but was added by Kang Senghui himself.

Edit

80-84

The title Milan jing 彌蘭經 (cf. T152(39)) is already found in Dao'an, who characterises the text as old; in CSZJJ, it is already explicitly treated as from the Liu du ji. It is excerpted in the Jing lü yi xiang. At least from the time of CSZJJ, this title is identified with the Milian jing 彌連經/彌蓮經. However, Tianchang compares the Milian jing as quoted in the Jing lü yi xiang with T152(39), and argues that the differences in wording are too great for them to represent the same text; they are, rather, two independent versions of the same material. Tianchang refers to a study by Itō Chikako of eight versions of the same narrative material; according to his summary, she treats material common to all versions, and concludes that T152(39) represents the version closest to the oldest form of the story accessible. Tianchang concludes that there are certain elements of the style that suggest the text is close to Kang Senghui, or even his work; it is at least quite old. At the same time, he holds, again, that the independent sūtra format makes it difficult to see how it could fit into the overall plan of the Liu du ji, so long as the collection is united by any coherent design whatsoever. He thus concludes that it is most likely that the text did not belong to the Indic original behind the Liu du ji, and that it should have been added into the collection before Sengyou at the latest.

Edit

87-89

The Mifeng wang jing 蜜蜂王經 T152(64) is listed among Dao'an's anonymous texts, and treated by Sengyou as taken from the Liu du ji. Fajing and bibliographers after him treat the text as a chao from the Liu du ji. This title does not appear in LDSBJ. Tianchang holds that the theme of the text fits the section in which it appears, on vīryapāramitā. However, the text takes the form of an independent sūtra, and the content centres on monks exchanging verses, which is atypical for the Liu du ji. Tianchang lists quite a number of relatively rare terms and items of phrasing he also holds atypical for Kang Senghui and the Liu du ji. He notes that many of these terms can be found in Dharmarakṣa. Tianchang's terms are: 阿惟越致, 不起法忍, 陀鄰尼 [sic: actually 陀隣尼], 不退轉地, 陰蓋, 般泥曰, 解諸法本, 善權方便, 當造光明智慧之本 [a peculiar choice—a hapax! – MR], 無央數人, 發無上平等度意. He focuses particularly on 般泥曰 and 發無上平等度意, which he says are particularly rare. He proposes that the only translator in whose works both these items are found is Dharmarakṣa: 般泥曰in several texts; 發無上平等度意 only in T334 [no single Dharmarakṣa work features both items – MR]. On this basis, Tianchang proposes that T152(64) is actually by Dharmarakṣa. This would obviously mean that the text would have to have been incorporated into the Liu du ji after its original composition. Tianchang concludes that this must have happened before the time of Sengyou.

[Note: Tianchang's methodology here is weak, since he only asks whether the terms in question are compatible with Dharmarakṣa, not whether they are exclusive to or distinctive of him; he also only considers the occurence of each of his terms in isolation, without considering where they might cluster with particular density -- MR.]

Edit

91-93

The last seven stories in the Jiu za piyu jing ascribed to Kang Senghui bear a common title Zhe luohan piyu chao qi shou 折羅漢譬喻抄七首 T206(55-61) (IV) 519a26. Shi Tianchang argues on the basis of translation terms that they cannot be by Kang Senghui. The terms he adduces are 須陀含, 斯陀含, 阿那含, 羅漢. Ven. Tianchang addresses the problem of these texts because they include repeated occurrences of the very rare phrase 發無上平等度意 (which he believes otherwise might be associated with Dharmarakṣa).

Edit

93 n. 84