| Identifier | T0343 [T] |
| Title | 佛說太子刷護經 [T] |
| Date | 西晋 [Hayashiya 1941] |
| Translator 譯 | Dharmarakṣa 竺法護, 曇摩羅察 [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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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 |
[Hayashiya 1941] Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎. Kyōroku kenkyū 経録研究. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1941. — 511-520 |
Hayashiya argues that the Taizi Hexiu jing 太子和休經 T344 and Taizi Shuahu jing 太子刷護經 T343 should be treated as the same text, an anonymous scripture of the W. Jin 西晋 period. There are only minor differences between the two, which are easily explicable as the sort of variations that could easily occur when a memorized text containing words in a foreign language is written down on paper. Otherwise, Hayashiya asserts, it would be impossible to explain the similarity between the Taizi Hexiu jing 太子和休經 and the Taizi Shuahu jing 太子刷護經. He further explains the most notable difference between the two, the names Hexiu and 和休 and Shuahu 刷護, as featured in the titles. According to him, the original word for both of these two words must be Sīha or Sīho, and Hexiu 和休 must originally have been Sixiu 私休. A Taizi Hexiu jing 太子和休經 is included in Dao'an's list of anonymous scriptures with a note saying that the Taizi Hexiu jing 太子和休經 is also called the Taizi Sixiu jing 太子私休經. This being the case, the difference between Sixiu 私休 and Shuahu 刷護 would be just a matter of the choice of characters in transcribing Sanskrit. Hayashiya points out that a graphic confusion between si 私 and he 和 can occur easily, as in 旃陀和利 in the 阿闍世王受決經, which Hayashiya suggests must originally have been 旃陀私利. The date of these texts, Hayashiya states, is clearly W. Jin 西晋, on stylistic grounds. T343 and T344, or the titles 太子和休經and 太子刷護經, were classified as different texts in a number of catalogues. Hayashiya points out that Sengyou 僧祐 listed the 太子刷護經 separately in his catalogue of assorted anonymous scriptures 失譯雑經錄, because he did not see the content of the Taizi Hexiu jing 太子和休經 and did not notice the significance of 和休 and 私休. Fajing appears to have noticed the extreme similarity between the two texts, but because of the difference in title and Sengyou's 僧祐 influence, still listed both, with a note that they are the same. DZKZM 大周刊定衆經目錄 wrongly ascribed the Taizi Hexiu jing 太子和休經 to Zhi Qian 支謙 and the Taizi Shuahu jing 太子刷護經 to Dharmarakṣa 竺法護, but on no particular grounds. KYL 開元錄 is right in listing the Taizi Hexiu jing 太子和休經 as an anonymous scripture of the W. Jin 西晋 period, but the title should have been Taizi Sixiu jing 太子私休經, and the entry ascribing a Taizi Shuahu jing 太子刷護經 to Dharmarakṣa 竺法護 should be removed. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 25b22 |
In Sengyou's Chu sanzang ji ji, T343 is regarded as an anonymous translation, that is to say, it is listed in the "Newly Compiled Continuation of the Assorted List of Anonymous Translations" 新集續撰失譯雜經錄 (juan 4), and is further identified as an excerpt 抄 from some other text: 太子刷護經一卷(抄). Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Mei 1996] Mei Naiwen 梅廼文. “Zhu Fahu de fanyi chutan 竺法護的翻譯初探.” Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal 中華佛學學報 9 (1996): 49-64. — 54-55 n. 27 |
|
The eighteen texts listed in this entry, Mei observes, are ascribed to Dharmarakṣa in the present Taishō, but not by CSZJJ. The majority of these texts, Mei suggests, did already exist at Sengyou's time, but Sengyou listed them as anonymous. Thus, Mei argues that further research is required to determine whether or not these texts really are by Dharmarakṣa. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
No |
[Fajing 594] Fajing 法經. Zhongjing mulu 眾經目錄 T2146. — T2146 (LV) 121c19 |
T343 is treated as anonymous in Fajing. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Fei 597] Fei Changfang 費長房. Lidai sanbao ji (LDSBJ) 歷代三寶紀 T2034. — T2034 (XLIX) 113b15 |
In LDSBJ, T343 is listed among miscellaneous Mahāyāna scriptures: 太子[ +刷 SYMP]護經一卷. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|