| Identifier | T0350 [T] |
| Title | 佛說遺日摩尼寶經 [T] |
| Date | [None] |
| Unspecified | Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 [Ōno 1954] |
| Translator 譯 | *Lokakṣema, 支婁迦讖 [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 |
[Zürcher 1991] Zürcher, Erik. "A New Look at the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Texts." in Koichi Shinohara and Gregory Schopen, eds. From Benares to Beijing: Essays on Buddhism and Chinese Religion in Honour of Prof. Jan Yün-hua, 277-304. Oakville, Canada: Mosaic Press, 1991. — 279, 299 |
Zürcher argues that *Lokakṣema’s Yi ri moni bao jing [佛說]遺日摩尼寶經 T350 [Kāśyapaparivarta] is one of a group of twenty-nine texts which can be considered “genuine” Han translations. Zürcher reaches this conclusion by a “critical selection” process which requires reliable bibliographic attribution, alongside corroborating evidence from glosses, colophons, prefaces, or commentaries; as well as internal “terminological and stylistic analysis” to identify distinctive features particular to certain translator’s teams. He adds that T350 is an “archaic translation of the Kāśyapaparivarta, about the Bodhisattva career and the doctrine of Emptiness.” Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
|
No |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 29c17 |
In Sengyou's Chu sanzang ji ji, T350 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): 佛遺日摩尼寶經一卷. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Fajing 594] Fajing 法經. Zhongjing mulu 眾經目錄 T2146. — T2146 (LV) 118b17 |
An interlinear note in Fajing ascribes this text to *Lokakṣema, with a date (光和年, 178-184): 佛遺日摩尼寶經一卷(後漢光和年支讖譯). [Note: This title is treated as anonymous in CSZJJ, so this ought to mean that this interlinear note in Fajing is the first place we see the ascription to *Lokakṣema --- MR.] Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Fei 597] Fei Changfang 費長房. Lidai sanbao ji (LDSBJ) 歷代三寶紀 T2034. — T2034 (XLIX) 53a2-3, 55b10 |
In LDSBJ, T350 is ascribed to *Lokakṣema, with an interlinear note that gives a few alternate titles and then a confusing reference to CSZJJ: 古品遺日說般若經一卷(出方等部。一名佛遺日摩尼寶經。一名摩訶衍寶嚴經。一名大寶積經。見僧祐錄). But this same title is also listed in LDSBJ among anonymous Han texts. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Ōno 1954] Ōno Hōdō 大野法道. Daijō kai kyō no kenkyū 大乗戒経の研究. Tokyo: Risōsha 理想社, 1954. — 98-102 |
Ōno points out that the Kāśyapaparivarta 遺日摩尼寶經 T350 ascribed to *Lokakṣema has never been treated as a precepts 戒 text in catalogues, although it clearly is one. This is a very old text, as one version was translated by *Lokakṣema as early as Guanghe 光和 2 of the Latter Han (179 CE). Ōno also states that the text is quoted in the *Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā 十住毘婆沙論, which he follows tradition in ascribing to Nāgārjuna. However, Ōno holds that the ascription of T350 to *Lokaṣema is incorrect, as the vocabulary of the extant T350 is later than the E. Jin. Meanwhile, he holds that the alternate translation, called just “Ratnakūṭa” 寶積經 (or also called Monibao jing 摩尼寶經), was attributed correctly attributed to *Lokakṣema, but has been lost. Sengyou included T350 in his newly compiled continuation of the catalogue of miscellaneous anonymous scriptures 新集續撰失譯雜經錄. Fajing first ascribed the text to *Lokakṣema. Ōno thinks that this mistake derived from confusion between the alternate title of *Lokakṣema’s so-called Ratnakūṭa 寶積經, viz., Monibao jing 摩尼寶經, and the title Weiri [ > Weiyue 遺曰] monibao jing 遺日摩尼寶經. Most catalogues followed Fajing. DZKZM 大周錄 ascribes the Monibao jing 摩尼寶經 to Dharmarakṣa, citing LDSBJ, but there is no such entry in LDSBJ. LDSBJ lists the Weiri [ > Weiyue] monibao jing 遺日摩尼寶經 as an anonymous scripture of the Latter Han period (in addition to the ascription of the same title to *Lokakṣema). KYL is mistaken in identifying the “older version of the scripture in which Weiri expounds prajñā” 古品遺日説般若經 with T350. Ōno adds that the Kāśyapaparivarta (the 遺日摩尼寶經 T350) was developed later into a variety of texts, including the 大寶積經 in one juan, an anonymous scripture of Latter Qin 後秦（viz., 第四十三普明菩薩會 T310(43) in the Ratnakūṭa T310). Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[Jiu lu CSZJJ] Jiu lu 舊錄 as reported by CSZJJ 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 6b17 |
Sengyou cites a/the Jiu lu 舊錄 as a source for information about the 寶積經 [this item is listed among the works of Lokakṣema; cf. the Kāśyapa-parivarta T350 --- MR]: 寶積經一卷(安公云一名摩尼寶光和二年出舊錄云摩尼寶經二卷) Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Staël-Holstein 1926] Staël-Holstein, Alexander von. The Kāçyapaparivarta: A Mahāyānasūtra of the Ratnakūṭa Class: Edited in the Original Sanskrit in Tibetan and in Chinese. Shanghai: Commercial Press, 1926. — IX, n. 22 |
Staël-Holstein argues that in the title of T350 we should read yue 曰 for ri 日, and that the title should correctly include 羅, to read Weiyueluo moni jing 遺曰羅摩尼寶經. He reports that he received from Wogihara a suggestion that 遺曰羅 is a transcription of *vipula or *vaipulya, and he follows that suggestion. (Staël-Holstein further suggests on this basis that the whole title be reconstructed Buddhabhāṣitavaipulyamaṇiratna-sūtra, treating 佛說 as an authentic part of the title; he also suggests that the title could be reconstructed *[Buddhabhāṣita]Vaipulyaratnakūṭa-sūtra.) Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Karashima 2015] Karashima, Seishi. "Who Composed the Mahāyāna Scriptures? The Mahāsāṃghikas and Vaitulya Scriptures." ARIRIAB XVIII (2015): 113-162. — 117, 118 n. 15 |
As part of a larger discussion of the history of genre identifiers (*vevulla, vaipulya, mahāyānasūtra etc.) in Mahāyāna scripturs, Karashima reconstructs the title of T350 as *vevulla-Maṇiratna-dharmaparyāya. At 118 n.15, he notes in support of this interpretation an instance of 摩訶惟曰羅 in Lokakṣema's T224, where Karashima reconstructs Gāndhārī *Maha-vevula < *Mahāvevulla < BHS Mahā-vaipulya. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Bie lu (DH mss)] "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, S.2872, P.3747. Dating complex and unclear. |
|
In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, P.3747, the following titles are listed, which may correspond to extant texts (in some cases, identification is rather tentative). In contrast to some other titles, which are treated in separate CBC@ entries, these titles are listed in the Bie lu without any further accompanying information (e.g. about ascription or date). Note that the Bie lu includes interlinear notes giving such information, and the scope of application of those interlinear notes is sometimes uncertain: it can be hard to tell whether they apply only to the single title preceding the note, or to a group of titles leading up to the note; and if they apply to a group of titles, how many. Titles in the DH ms. Bie lu are identified by the numbering in Tan (1991), given at the beginning of each line. S.2872 P.3747 Many of these same titles are treated as anonymous and extant in CSZJJ fascicle 4. The same is also true of a number of titles not listed here, because the texts in question appear not to be extant. Texts presently ascribed to Dharmarakṣa and to Zhi Qian (excepting T361) are excluded from this entry, because they are treated in other CBC@ entries. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|