Source: Ueyama 1990

Ueyama Daishun 上山大峻. Tonkō Bukkyō no kenkyū 敦煌仏教の研究. Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 1990.

Assertions

Assertion	Argument	Place in source	Search
Texts: T0936; 大乘無量壽經; Wuliangshou zongyao jing 無量壽宗要經 Titles: Wuliangshou zongyao jing 無量壽宗要經 People: Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 (translator 譯)	Ueyama excludes this translation from the list of Facheng’s works (pp. 89-90). He argues, “Although the Shōwa hōhō sōmokuroku 昭和法宝総目録 [for the Taishō Canon] lists Facheng as the translator of this sutra, no manuscript has been found that clearly states this. Therefore, [the attribution] is merely speculation. I assume that it was translated by an unknown translator before Facheng. Because Facheng is thought to be the translator, [the Chinese text] is assumed to be a retranslation of a Tibetan text. However, it is uncertain from which language the Chinese text was translated.” (p. 438) According to Ueyama, there exists a different translation of this text (異訳本) in the Dunhuang corpus. He suggests that this alternative version represents a trial version that was translated before the more definitive version (i.e., T936) was produced (p. 455). Ueyama also points out that the text is commonly referred to as Foshuo wuliangshou zongyao jing 佛說無量壽宗要經 at the end of a manuscript (p. 439). Edit		Ueyama excludes this translation from the list of Facheng’s works (pp. 89-90). He argues, “Although the Showa hoho somokuroku 昭和法宝総目録 [for the Taisho Canon] lists Facheng as the translator of this sutra, no manuscript has been found that clearly states this. Therefore, [the attribution] is merely speculation. I assume that it was translated by an unknown translator before Facheng. Because Facheng is thought to be the translator, [the Chinese text] is assumed to be a retranslation of a Tibetan text. However, it is uncertain from which language the Chinese text was translated.” (p. 438) According to Ueyama, there exists a different translation of this text (異訳本) in the Dunhuang corpus. He suggests that this alternative version represents a trial version that was translated before the more definitive version (i.e., T936) was produced (p. 455). Ueyama also points out that the text is commonly referred to as Foshuo wuliangshou zongyao jing 佛說無量壽宗要經 at the end of a manuscript (p. 439). Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 T0936; 大乘無量壽經; Wuliangshou zongyao jing 無量壽宗要經

Assertion

Argument

Place in source

Texts: T0936; 大乘無量壽經; Wuliangshou zongyao jing 無量壽宗要經
Titles: Wuliangshou zongyao jing 無量壽宗要經
People: Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 (translator 譯)

Ueyama excludes this translation from the list of Facheng’s works (pp. 89-90). He argues, “Although the Shōwa hōhō sōmokuroku 昭和法宝総目録 [for the Taishō Canon] lists Facheng as the translator of this sutra, no manuscript has been found that clearly states this. Therefore, [the attribution] is merely speculation. I assume that it was translated by an unknown translator before Facheng. Because Facheng is thought to be the translator, [the Chinese text] is assumed to be a retranslation of a Tibetan text. However, it is uncertain from which language the Chinese text was translated.” (p. 438)

According to Ueyama, there exists a different translation of this text (異訳本) in the Dunhuang corpus. He suggests that this alternative version represents a trial version that was translated before the more definitive version (i.e., T936) was produced (p. 455).

Ueyama also points out that the text is commonly referred to as Foshuo wuliangshou zongyao jing 佛說無量壽宗要經 at the end of a manuscript (p. 439).

Edit