Source: Nattier 2023

Nattier, Jan. "The 'Missing Majority': Dao'an's Anonymous Scriptures Revisted." In Chinese Buddhism and the Scholarship of Erik Zürcher, edited by Jonathan Silk and Stefano Zacchetti, 94-140. Leiden: Brill, 2023.

Assertions

Assertion Argument Place in source Search

Nattier argues that a small group of anonymous scriptures, comprising T5, T20, T46, T145, T392, T507, and T582, were probably composed in the South in the third century. Her argument is based upon the presence of some very rare vocabulary/terminology, which otherwise appears (in datable texts) in translations produced in this time and place (T225B, T152), and also on the absence of other, very common terms.

Edit

95 n. 7, 115-116 w. nn. 73-75,

Nattier argues that a small group of anonymous scriptures, comprising T5, T20, T46, T145, T392, T507, and T582, were probably composed in the South in the third century. Her argument is based upon the presence of some very rare vocabulary/terminology, which otherwise appears (in datable texts) in translations produced in this time and place (T225B, T152), and also on the absence of other, very common terms. T0005; 佛般泥洹經 T0020; 阿拔經; Fanzhi Aba jing 梵志阿颰經; 梵志阿跋經; 阿拔摩納經; Ambattha-sutra; 佛開解梵志阿颰經; 梵志阿颰經 T0046; 阿那律八念經; Jian yi xiang zheng jing 撿意向正經; Chan xing lian yi jing 禪行斂意經; Ba nian jing 八念經 T0145; 佛母般泥洹經 T0392; 佛滅度後棺斂葬送經 T0507; 佛說未生冤經; 未生怨經 T0582; 佛說孫多耶致經; *Sundarika-sutra; 梵志孫陀耶致經

Nattier identifies five texts from the Liu du ji (jing) T152 as bearing titles corresponding to items appearing in Dao'an's list of anonymous sūtras: in T152, these are texts nos. 13, 41, 64, 88 and 91 .

Edit

97 n. 9

Nattier identifies five texts from the Liu du ji (jing) T152 as bearing titles corresponding to items appearing in Dao'an's list of anonymous sutras: in T152, these are texts nos. 13, 41, 64, 88 and 91 . T152(13); Sahetan wang jing 薩和檀王經 T152(41); Puming wang jing 普明王經 T152(64); Mifeng wang jing 蜜蜂王經 T152(88); Alinianmi jing 阿離念彌經 T152(91); Fan huang jing 梵皇經; Fanmo huang jing 梵摩皇經

Nattier suggests that the title Pusa daoshu jing 菩薩道樹經 in Dao'an's list of anonymous sūtra translations may correspond to T532, because T532 circulated under this alternate title.

Edit

97 n. 9

Nattier suggests that the title Pusa daoshu jing 菩薩道樹經 in Dao'an's list of anonymous sutra translations may correspond to T532, because T532 circulated under this alternate title. T0532; Sihemei jing, 私呵昧經; Sihemo jing, 私呵末經; Sihe sanmei jing, 私呵三昧經; Pusa daoshu jing, 菩薩道樹經; Simhamati-sutra; Daoshu sanmei jing, 道樹三昧經

Nattier suggests that the title Shi biqiu jing 師比丘經 in Dao'an's list of anonymous sūtra translations may correspond to T392, because T392 circulated under this alternate title.

Edit

97 n. 9

Nattier suggests that the title Shi biqiu jing 師比丘經 in Dao'an's list of anonymous sutra translations may correspond to T392, because T392 circulated under this alternate title. T0392; 佛滅度後棺斂葬送經

Nattier suggests that the title Nei wai liu boluomi jing 內外六波蘿蜜經 in Dao'an's list of anonymous sūtra translations may correspond to T778.

Edit

97 n. 9

Nattier suggests that the title Nei wai liu boluomi jing 內外六波蘿蜜經 in Dao'an's list of anonymous sutra translations may correspond to T778. T0778; 佛說菩薩內習六波羅蜜經

Nattier suggests that the title Shi shan shi e jing 十善十惡經 in Dao'an's list of anonymous sūtra translations may correspond to T729 [NOTE: Nattier's text in fact reads T792, but this is certainly a typo --- MR].

Edit

97 n. 9

Nattier suggests that the title Shi shan shi e jing 十善十惡經 in Dao'an's list of anonymous sutra translations may correspond to T729 [NOTE: Nattier's text in fact reads T792, but this is certainly a typo --- MR]. T0729; Fenbie pinfu shan'e suoqi jing 分別貧富善惡所起經; Shi shan shi e jing 十善十惡經; 佛說分別善惡所起經

Nattier mentions T525 as an example of an ascription to An Shigao which is rendered implausible by the presence in the text of verse, which never appears in his authentic translations.

Edit

99 n. 14

Nattier mentions T525 as an example of an ascription to An Shigao which is rendered implausible by the presence in the text of verse, which never appears in his authentic translations. T0525; 佛說長者子懊惱三處經; San chu nao jing 三處惱經

Nattier mentions T530 as an example of an ascription to Zhi Qian rendered implausible by the presence in the text of 如是我聞, which is never used before Kumārajīva.

Edit

99 n. 15

Nattier mentions T530 as an example of an ascription to Zhi Qian rendered implausible by the presence in the text of 如是我聞, which is never used before Kumarajiva. T0530; 佛說須摩提長者經

Citing personal communication from Antonello Palumbo, Nattier mentions T514 as a possible case in which the formula 如是我聞 might have been added to an earlier text in the course of transmission. The Song, Yuan, Ming and Palace editions all have 聞如是.

Edit

104 n. 28

Citing personal communication from Antonello Palumbo, Nattier mentions T514 as a possible case in which the formula 如是我聞 might have been added to an earlier text in the course of transmission. The Song, Yuan, Ming and Palace editions all have 聞如是. T0514; 佛說諫王經; 大小諫王經

The earliest external evidence for the existence of the Fo mu bannihuan jing 佛母般泥洹經 T145 is found in the sixth century, in citations in anthologies compiled by Sengyou and Baochang (120). However, Nattier argues that T145 is one of a small group of anonymous sūtras that can be identifed as belonging to the Wu kingdom. Her argument is based in part on a cluster of rare items of vocabulary and terminology, which are only found in texts of secure ascription from this same period, like T225B and T152. Nattier gives examples of such wording in T145 at 120 n. 88.

Nattier's argument is also based upon the close comparison of T145 with T144, which is a parallel version of "the same" text (carries the same content). She identifies a number of differences between the two texts: a tendency to transcription in T144, contrasting with a tendency to translation in T145; greater brevity in T144 than in T145.

Nattier argues that T144 is even earlier than T145, and T145 was produced with reference to T144. This pattern fits with other known cases of texts that were produced under the Wu, especially by Zhi Qian, with reference to earlier versions of the same texts (e.g. T224 > T225B, T362 > T361).

An important corollary of these observations is that the titles of the two texts appear to have been swapped at some point in transmission history (an argument made independently by Hayashiya many years ago; n. 84). This development must have taken place early, since the texts are cited under their swapped titles in anthologies of the sixth century.

Nattier also notes that in T144, a number of proper names shift from one transcription to another at a certain point in the text (126): for Vaiśālī, Śāriputra, Maudgalyāyana, and Yaśodha. (Mysteriously, the point at which this shift takes place is not the same for all the names in question.) She argues that this indicates that even before it was revised or used as a basis to produce T145, T144 itself had already undergone some sort of revision, which was left incomplete, and which is only betrayed by these traces within the text itself. She argues that the transcriptions in the first part of the text are products of revision, appealing to two criteria: it is generally the case that revision is "front-loaded", i.e. that revisers work from the beginning of a text forwards; and the transcriptions in the latter part of the text, in each case, are rare than those in the first part. This suggests that the transcriptions in the latter part of the text are original. The better-known transcriptions in the first part of the text align with known usage in the school of Lokakṣema, and this fact, along with the rarity of the "unrevised" transcriptions, suggests that this base layer of T144 might be very old indeed.

Edit

95 n. 7, 115-116 w. nn. 73-75, 118-129

The earliest external evidence for the existence of the Fo mu bannihuan jing 佛母般泥洹經 T145 is found in the sixth century, in citations in anthologies compiled by Sengyou and Baochang (120). However, Nattier argues that T145 is one of a small group of anonymous sutras that can be identifed as belonging to the Wu kingdom. Her argument is based in part on a cluster of rare items of vocabulary and terminology, which are only found in texts of secure ascription from this same period, like T225B and T152. Nattier gives examples of such wording in T145 at 120 n. 88. Nattier's argument is also based upon the close comparison of T145 with T144, which is a parallel version of "the same" text (carries the same content). She identifies a number of differences between the two texts: a tendency to transcription in T144, contrasting with a tendency to translation in T145; greater brevity in T144 than in T145. Nattier argues that T144 is even earlier than T145, and T145 was produced with reference to T144. This pattern fits with other known cases of texts that were produced under the Wu, especially by Zhi Qian, with reference to earlier versions of the same texts (e.g. T224 > T225B, T362 > T361). An important corollary of these observations is that the titles of the two texts appear to have been swapped at some point in transmission history (an argument made independently by Hayashiya many years ago; n. 84). This development must have taken place early, since the texts are cited under their swapped titles in anthologies of the sixth century. Nattier also notes that in T144, a number of proper names shift from one transcription to another at a certain point in the text (126): for Vaisali, Sariputra, Maudgalyayana, and Yasodha. (Mysteriously, the point at which this shift takes place is not the same for all the names in question.) She argues that this indicates that even before it was revised or used as a basis to produce T145, T144 itself had already undergone some sort of revision, which was left incomplete, and which is only betrayed by these traces within the text itself. She argues that the transcriptions in the first part of the text are products of revision, appealing to two criteria: it is generally the case that revision is "front-loaded", i.e. that revisers work from the beginning of a text forwards; and the transcriptions in the latter part of the text, in each case, are rare than those in the first part. This suggests that the transcriptions in the latter part of the text are original. The better-known transcriptions in the first part of the text align with known usage in the school of Lokaksema, and this fact, along with the rarity of the "unrevised" transcriptions, suggests that this base layer of T144 might be very old indeed. T0144; 佛說大愛道般泥洹經 T0145; 佛母般泥洹經

Nattier points out that the Fo bannihuan hou bian ji 佛般泥洹後變記, which is carried at the end of T145, is in fact a separate text.

Edit

119 n. 84

Nattier points out that the Fo bannihuan hou bian ji 佛般泥洹後變記, which is carried at the end of T145, is in fact a separate text. Fo bannihuan hou bian ji 佛般泥洹後變記

Nattier shows that the Sunduoyezhi jing 孫多耶致經 T582 is a parallel to the Vatthūpama-sutta MN 7.

Edit

133-134

Nattier shows that the Sunduoyezhi jing 孫多耶致經 T582 is a parallel to the Vatthupama-sutta MN 7. T0582; 佛說孫多耶致經; *Sundarika-sutra; 梵志孫陀耶致經