| Identifier | T0388 [T] |
| Title | 大雲無想經卷第九 [T] |
| Date | [None] |
| Translator 譯 | Zhu Fonian 竺佛念 [T] |
There may be translations for this text listed in the Bibliography of Translations from the Chinese Buddhist Canon into Western Languages. If translations are listed, this link will take you directly to them. However, if no translations are listed, the link will lead only to the head of the page.
There are resources for the study of this text in the SAT Daizōkyō Text Dabatase (Saṃgaṇikīkṛtaṃ Taiśotripiṭakaṃ).
| Preferred? | Source | Pertains to | Argument | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Yes |
[Radich 2017] Radich, Michael. "Problems of Attribution, Style, and Dating Relating to the 'Great Cloud Sūtras' in the Chinese Buddhist Canon (T 387, T 388/S.6916)." In Buddhist Transformations and Interactions: Papers in Honor of Antonino Forte, edited by Victor H. Mair, 235-289. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press, 2017. |
Radich argues, on the basis of internal (stylistic) evidence, that T388 is to be most closely associated with the idiom of *Dharmakṣema. However, peculiarities in the patterns of shared terminology between this and other Dharmakṣema texts argue against us taking this text as a straight translation, and suggest, rather, that it may have been composed on the basis of a close set of Dharmakṣema texts, or by someone steeped in the Dharmakṣema idiom, etc. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Radich 2017a] Radich, Michael. “On the Ekottarikāgama 增壹阿含經 T 125 as a Work of Zhu Fonian 竺佛念.” Journal of Chinese Buddhist Studies 30 (2017): 1-31. — 23-24 |
In the course of a study whose primary focus is an attempt to argue in favour of reascription of the *Ekottarikāgama T125 to Zhu Fonian, Radich mentions that the numerous markers of Zhu Fonian style he uncovered in the course of that study (137 markers, occurring a total of 6,200 times in the Ekottarikāgama, and approx. 15,520 times further in the core Zhu Fonian corpus of DĀ, T212, T656, T1428 and T1464) appear very seldom, if ever, in T226, T1485, and T388. This provides further, unsystematic support for arguments in prior scholarship that these three texts are in fact not by Zhu Fonian, despite traditional ascriptions or (in the case of T388), suggestions by other scholars. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[T] T = CBETA [Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association]. Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新脩大藏經. Edited by Takakusu Junjirō 高楠順次郎 and Watanabe Kaigyoku 渡邊海旭. Tokyo: Taishō shinshū daizōkyō kankōkai/Daizō shuppan, 1924-1932. CBReader v 5.0, 2014. |
Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Ono and Maruyama 1933-1936] Ono Genmyō 小野玄妙, Maruyama Takao 丸山孝雄, eds. Bussho kaisetsu daijiten 佛書解說大辭典. Tokyo: Daitō shuppan, 1933-1936 [縮刷版 1999]. — s.v., Vol.7, 213-214 (Mino Kōjun 美濃晃順) |
Mino Kōjun 美濃晃順 summarizes the issues surrounding ascription of 大雲無想經第九 T388 and his views on the question as follows: The text of T388 was found in early modern times 近世. It is difficult to determine certain details about this text, due to the fact that parts are missing. LDSBJ 三寶記 lists a Da yun wuxiang jing 大雲無想經 translated by Zhu Fonian 竺佛念, but Mino claims that this entry is unlikely to refer to T388, because LDSBJ states that this text was in four or five juan 巻. Considering the content, T388 is related to the Mahāparinirvāṇa-mahāsūtra 涅槃經 T374 translated by *Dharmakṣema 曇無讖. The content also has some elements that pose issues that have remained unsolved, such as why the Fanshi 梵士 has a Chinese name [viz. 直道--MR], or what is meant by 五大身説. Mino conjectures that there is a possibility that T388 was written based on T374 涅槃經 and the Da fangdeng wuxiang jing 大方等無想經 T387, both translated by *Dharmakṣema, taking the title from the fact that T387 might be incomplete, since a note attached to T387 states that the text is the first part of the *Mahāmegha-sutra 大雲經 (大雲經初分). Although the title of T388 identifies it as the ninth (juan) 第九, Mino maintains that in form and content, it can stand as an independent text. He does not say explicitly that the text should be classified as an anonymous scripture, but he clearly implies that he regards the text as anonymous. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|