Text: T0220; 大般若波羅蜜多經

Summary

Identifier	T0220 [T]
Title	大般若波羅蜜多經 [T]
Date	[None]
Translator 譯	Xuanzang, 玄奘 [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).

Assertions

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.	T0220; 大般若波羅蜜多經	Entry author: Michael Radich Edit	Title: 大般若波羅蜜多經 People: Xuanzang, 玄奘 (translator 譯) Identifier: T0220
No	[Takasaki 1988] Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道. "Mujōe kyō to Shōtennō hannya 『無上依經』と『勝天王般若』." Naritasan bukkyō kenkyūjo kiyō 成田山仏教研究所紀要 11 (1988): 171-194.	T0220; 大般若波羅蜜多經 T220(6); *Devarājapravara prajñāpāramitā	Takasaki's central argument in this article is that the Devarājapravara prajñāpāramitā(?) 勝天王般若波羅蜜經 T231 was largely composed in China, in significant part on the basis of the Anuttarāśraya-sūtra 無上依經 T669. Perhaps the most serious obstacle his hypothesis faces is the fact that Xuanzang's T220 contains a version of the Devarājapravara prajñāpāramitā, T220(6) (fascicles 566-573). If Xuanzang's text is a true translation, that should mean that T231 could not have been composed in China, but should also be a true translation. Conversely, if T231 is a Chinese composition, it problematises T220(6). Takasaki adduces reasons to believe that T220 is a collection of texts which never existed in the same exact form outside China, but rather, was produced in Xuanzang's group. He then argues that it is probable that in producing T220(6), Xuanzang's group merely revised T231, without consulting an Indic manuscript. The most telling piece of evidence in this respect is a detail in the exposition of a fourfold rubric of respects in which tathāgatadharmatā/-dharmadhātu are acinyta. Here, the "cause" is tathāgatadhātu/-garbha, and the "fruit/effect" is dharmakāya. For this exposition to make sense, -dharmatā etc. must be common to both cause and fruit, and unchanging. In the source passage for both T669 and T231, in the Ratnagotravibhāga, this role is filled by the eponymous ratnagotra. In T231, this is reworded as "merits and dharmas", 功德及法, but this means that here, guṇa must be equivalent to dharma, in which case dharma can only refer to the āveṇikadharmas etc. In Xuanzang's T220, 及法 is reformulated 及所說法, i.e. interpreted to refer to deśanādharma. Takasaki characterises this a mistake, and a rare anomly in "Xuanzang's" translation practice; he believes it could not happen during direct translation from an Indic source text, and therefore betrays the fact that Xuanzang's group was working from T231 only. Entry author: Michael Radich Edit
No	[Zacchetti 2015] Zacchetti, Stefano. “Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras.” In Brill’s Encyclopedia of Buddhism, Volume One: Literature and Languages, edited by Jonathan Silk, Oskar von Hinüber, and Vincent Eltschinger, 171-209. Leiden: Brill, 2015. — 199	T0220; 大般若波羅蜜多經 T0234; 佛說濡首菩薩無上清淨分衛經; Jueliao zhufa ru huanhua sanmei jing 決了諸法如幻化三昧經	The received ascription of 濡首菩薩無上清淨分衛經 T234 to Xiang gong 翔公 goes back to LDSBJ, and has been questioned by Hikata, xvi, and Kajiyoshi, 138-139. Zacchetti suggests further that it is unclear to what extent T234 is a separate text from T220(8), following Kajiyoshi 139. Referring to: Kajiyoshi Kōun 梶芳光運. Daijō Bukkyō no seiritsu shiteki kenkyū–Genshi hannyakyō no kenkyū: sono ichi 大乗仏教の成立史的研究—原始般若経の研究：その一. Tokyo: The Sankibo Press, 1980. Hikata, Ryusho 1958. Suvikrāntavikrāmi-paripṛcchā-Prajñāpāramitā-sūtra Edited with an Introductory Essay. Fukuoka: Comittee of Commemoration Program for Dr. Hikata's Retirement from Professorship, Kyushu University. Entry author: Michael Radich Edit

Preferred?

Source

Pertains to

Argument

Details

[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.

T0220; 大般若波羅蜜多經

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

Title: 大般若波羅蜜多經
People: Xuanzang, 玄奘 (translator 譯)
Identifier: T0220

[Takasaki 1988] Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道. "Mujōe kyō to Shōtennō hannya 『無上依經』と『勝天王般若』." Naritasan bukkyō kenkyūjo kiyō 成田山仏教研究所紀要 11 (1988): 171-194.

Takasaki's central argument in this article is that the *Devarājapravara prajñāpāramitā(?) 勝天王般若波羅蜜經 T231 was largely composed in China, in significant part on the basis of the *Anuttarāśraya-sūtra 無上依經 T669. Perhaps the most serious obstacle his hypothesis faces is the fact that Xuanzang's T220 contains a version of the *Devarājapravara prajñāpāramitā, T220(6) (fascicles 566-573). If Xuanzang's text is a true translation, that should mean that T231 could not have been composed in China, but should also be a true translation. Conversely, if T231 is a Chinese composition, it problematises T220(6). Takasaki adduces reasons to believe that T220 is a collection of texts which never existed in the same exact form outside China, but rather, was produced in Xuanzang's group. He then argues that it is probable that in producing T220(6), Xuanzang's group merely revised T231, without consulting an Indic manuscript. The most telling piece of evidence in this respect is a detail in the exposition of a fourfold rubric of respects in which *tathāgatadharmatā/-dharmadhātu are acinyta. Here, the "cause" is tathāgatadhātu/-garbha, and the "fruit/effect" is dharmakāya. For this exposition to make sense, *-dharmatā etc. must be common to both cause and fruit, and unchanging. In the source passage for both T669 and T231, in the Ratnagotravibhāga, this role is filled by the eponymous ratnagotra. In T231, this is reworded as "merits and dharmas", 功德及法, but this means that here, guṇa must be equivalent to dharma, in which case *dharma can only refer to the āveṇikadharmas etc. In Xuanzang's T220, 及法 is reformulated 及所說法, i.e. interpreted to refer to deśanādharma. Takasaki characterises this a mistake, and a rare anomly in "Xuanzang's" translation practice; he believes it could not happen during direct translation from an Indic source text, and therefore betrays the fact that Xuanzang's group was working from T231 only.

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

[Zacchetti 2015] Zacchetti, Stefano. “Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras.” In Brill’s Encyclopedia of Buddhism, Volume One: Literature and Languages, edited by Jonathan Silk, Oskar von Hinüber, and Vincent Eltschinger, 171-209. Leiden: Brill, 2015. — 199

The received ascription of 濡首菩薩無上清淨分衛經 T234 to Xiang gong 翔公 goes back to LDSBJ, and has been questioned by Hikata, xvi, and Kajiyoshi, 138-139. Zacchetti suggests further that it is unclear to what extent T234 is a separate text from T220(8), following Kajiyoshi 139. Referring to:

Kajiyoshi Kōun 梶芳光運. Daijō Bukkyō no seiritsu shiteki kenkyū–Genshi hannyakyō no kenkyū: sono ichi 大乗仏教の成立史的研究—原始般若経の研究：その一. Tokyo: The Sankibo Press, 1980.

Hikata, Ryusho 1958. Suvikrāntavikrāmi-paripṛcchā-Prajñāpāramitā-sūtra Edited with an Introductory Essay. Fukuoka: Comittee of Commemoration Program for Dr. Hikata's Retirement from Professorship, Kyushu University.

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit