Source: Radich DDB

Radich, DDB s.v. Fachang 法場

Assertions

Assertion Argument Place in source Search

"[Fachang] ostensibly worked in Luoyang c. 500–515. He is traditionally credited with the translation of the Bianyi changzhe zi jing (Pratibhānamatiparipṛcchā) 辯意長者子經 T 544 (as seen in the Daizōkyō zen kaisetsu daijiten, Foguang Dictionary, Lancaster's Catalogue, etc.). However, Dao'an's 道安 biography in both the Gaoseng zhuan 高僧傳 and the Chu sanzang ji ji 出三藏記集 reports that when young, he amazed his teacher by memorizing this text in a single day (T 2059.50.351c8–12, T 2145.55.108a4–8); this would be anachronistic if the text were not translated until the sixth century. Moreover, Fachang is ascribed with only this one text, which can be ground for suspicion of attributions made for this period. The ascription also first appears in Fei Changfang's 費長房 often unreliable Lidai sanbao ji 歷代三寶記 (T 2034.49.85c11–13). The authors and editors of the Zhongjing mulu 衆經目錄 series do not note this ascription, but instead uniformly report that there was an old version translated by Dharmarakṣa 法護 under the Wei 魏, e.g. T 2146.55.128b11. Further, some text of this name seems to be well attested already by the opening of the sixth century or before. Sengyou 僧祐 already includes it in a list of anonymous texts that he found in Dao'an's own (lost) catalogue, T 2145.55.17b26. The Jing lü yi xiang 經律異相 also includes an excerpt, T 2121.53.190b24–c14 (it is possible this could have been from the new translation, if the dates given by the tradition for Fachang's floruit, and the ascription of the text, are accurate). In the eighth century, these various facts make Zhisheng 智昇 highly suspicious of Fei's attribution of the text to Fachang: 撰錄者曰謹按高僧等傳竝云晉時道安出家數載方啓師求經師創付辯意經一卷可五千言一覽便誦又安公失譯復載其名准此東晉之時辨意已行於世如何至魏宣武始云法場出也, T 2154.55.540b1–3. Taking these facts together, and pending examination of the language of the text, etc., it seems safest to suppose that there was probably only ever one translation of the sutra in question, which most likely was in circulation long before Fachang's time; and the ascription to Fachang is an error on Fei Changfang's part (might he have misread a cursive 護 in 法護 as 場 = 法場?)."

Edit

Accessed April 2014.

 "[Fachang] ostensibly worked in Luoyang c. 500–515. He is traditionally credited with the translation of the Bianyi changzhe zi jing (Pratibhanamatipariprccha) 辯意長者子經 T 544 (as seen in the Daizokyo zen kaisetsu daijiten, Foguang Dictionary, Lancaster's Catalogue, etc.). However, Dao'an's 道安 biography in both the Gaoseng zhuan 高僧傳 and the Chu sanzang ji ji 出三藏記集 reports that when young, he amazed his teacher by memorizing this text in a single day (T 2059.50.351c8–12, T 2145.55.108a4–8); this would be anachronistic if the text were not translated until the sixth century. Moreover, Fachang is ascribed with only this one text, which can be ground for suspicion of attributions made for this period. The ascription also first appears in Fei Changfang's 費長房 often unreliable Lidai sanbao ji 歷代三寶記 (T 2034.49.85c11–13). The authors and editors of the Zhongjing mulu 衆經目錄 series do not note this ascription, but instead uniformly report that there was an old version translated by Dharmaraksa 法護 under the Wei 魏, e.g. T 2146.55.128b11. Further, some text of this name seems to be well attested already by the opening of the sixth century or before. Sengyou 僧祐 already includes it in a list of anonymous texts that he found in Dao'an's own (lost) catalogue, T 2145.55.17b26. The Jing lu yi xiang 經律異相 also includes an excerpt, T 2121.53.190b24–c14 (it is possible this could have been from the new translation, if the dates given by the tradition for Fachang's floruit, and the ascription of the text, are accurate). In the eighth century, these various facts make Zhisheng 智昇 highly suspicious of Fei's attribution of the text to Fachang: 撰錄者曰謹按高僧等傳竝云晉時道安出家數載方啓師求經師創付辯意經一卷可五千言一覽便誦又安公失譯復載其名准此東晉之時辨意已行於世如何至魏宣武始云法場出也, T 2154.55.540b1–3. Taking these facts together, and pending examination of the language of the text, etc., it seems safest to suppose that there was probably only ever one translation of the sutra in question, which most likely was in circulation long before Fachang's time; and the ascription to Fachang is an error on Fei Changfang's part (might he have misread a cursive 護 in 法護 as 場 = 法場?)." T0544; *Pratibhanamati-pariprccha; Zhangzhe Bianyi jing 長者辯意經; 辯意長者子經