| Identifier | T1490 [T] |
| Title | 寂調音所問經 [T] |
| Date | E. Han [Fei 597] |
| Translator 譯 | Fahai, 法海 [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 |
[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. 5, 44 (Ōno Hōdō 大野法道) |
Ōno Hōdō 大野法道 explains that LDSBJ 三寶記 regarded the Jidiaoyin suowen jing 寂調音所問經 T1490 as translated by Fahai 法海, basing itself upon the Shixing catalogue 始興錄 and Fashang's catalogue 法上録. Subsequently, KYL 開元錄 and other catalogues after LDSBJ reproduced these same details. Also, the Wu Zhou catalogue 武周録 (DZKZM) states that this title is recorded in the *Dharmottara catalogue 達磨鬱多羅錄 [= alternate name for Fashang's catalogue?---MR]. Ōno points out, however, that the 新集續撰 of the catalogue of assorted anonymous scriptures 新集續撰失譯雜經錄 in CSZJJ 出三藏記集 lists this title as an anonymous. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[Fajing 594] Fajing 法經. Zhongjing mulu 眾經目錄 T2146. — T2146 (LV) 139b17 |
Ascribed to Fahai in an interlinear note in Fajing: 寂調音所問經一卷(沙門法海譯). [This same text is treated as anonymous in CSZJJ, so this is probably the first time it is ascribed to Fahai --- 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) 54c12, 94a16-17, 114b22 |
In LDSBJ, a title corresponding to T1490 is listed in the anonymous E. Han catalogue, for which Fei cites CSZJJ 僧祐律師出三藏記, Gu lu and Jiu lu 古舊二錄, and Dao'an. A second notice ascribes the text to Fahai, saying that it is an alternate version of a text translated by Dharmarakṣa: 寂調音所問經一卷(一名如來所說清淨調伏經與晉世竺法護文殊行律同本異出). The title is also listed among anonymous texts in Fascicle 13. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 22c5 |
In Sengyou's Chu sanzang ji ji, T1490 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): 寂調意[v.l. 音 SYM]所問經一卷(一名如來所說清淨調伏). Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Sakaino 1935] Sakaino Kōyō 境野黄洋. Shina Bukkyō seishi 支那佛教精史. Tokyo: Sakaino Kōyō Hakushi Ikō Kankōkai, 1935. — 851 |
The ascription of the Jitiaoyin suowen jing 寂調音所問經 T1490 (cf. T1489, T460) to Fahai 法海 first appears in LDSBJ, which cites the Shixing catalogue 始興錄 and Fashang’s catalogue 法上錄. No biographical information has been found about Fahai. An anonymous Jitiaoyin suowen jing is listed in the newly compiled catalogue of assorted anonymous scriptures 新集失譯雜經錄 of CSZJJ, with the alternate title Rulai suoshuo qingjing tiaofu 如來所説清淨調伏 (T2145 [LV] 22c5). [Sakaino is apparently suggesting that the ascription to 法海 is dubious, but he does not state it explicitly --- AI] Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
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. — 116 |
The third oldest translation of the Paramārthasaṃvṛtisatya-nirdeśa is the Jitiaoyin suowen jing 寂調音所問經 T1490. The ascription of the text to Fahai 法海 of the Liu Song came from LDSBJ, citing the Shixing catalogue 始興錄 and Fashang. Other catalogues down to KYL 諸經[sic]乃至開元錄 followed LDSBJ and gave the same ascription. Ōno admits that the vocabulary of T1490 is that of the Liu Song period. Still, he points out that the title Jitiaoyin suowen jing is listed as an anonymous scripture in CSZJJ, and so too in LDSBJ (fourth juan), DTNDL, and other catalogues. [Ōno does not say which of the two views he thinks is more plausible ---AI .] Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[Naitō 1970] Naitō Ryūo 内藤竜雄. "Hō Kyō roku ni tsuite 法經錄について." IBK 19, no. 1 (1970): 235-238. |
|
Naitō gives some general information about Fajing's 法經 Zhongjing mulu 眾經目錄 T2146. It was composed in the space of two months in 594 by a commission of 22 scholars. Hayashiya argued that the catalogue was composed in preparation for the copying of the full canon. Naitō argues that there must have been some circumstances precipitating the rush. He notes that suspicious texts were also recorded and categorised as such, which would be odd if the sole purpose of the catalogue was to list works to be included in an approved version of the canon. He therefore proposes that the catalogue, and the canon connected to it, were prepared as a response to the notorious incident in Guangzhou in 593 surrounding the use of the Zhancha jing 占察經, in which practices of self-flagellation, "stupa repentance" rites, and the "mixing of the sixes" were connected with the use of a scripture that a commission of experts then declared spurious. Among the reasons they gave that the text was inauthentic was that the text was recorded in no earlier catalogues, which Naitō treats as circumstantial evidence that there was a mentality current that could see the compilation of a new catalogue as associated with a similar agenda to determine which texts were authoritative and, by implication, which were spurious, in order to forestall recurrence of like incidents. Naitō also treats the problem of the sources of Fajing's work. Determination of his sources is made difficult by the fact that the catalogue does not explicitly give its sources. Fei Zhangfang/Changfang says that Fajing had seventeen catalogues at his disposal, but then does not himself admit that so many catalogues were extant in their time. Naitō reports very briefly that he has compared the treatment of extant translations in Fajing with treatment in other sources, for a total of 79 translators and 556 works, but here gives no details, rather, promising to report his findings in another venue. He notes that a total of 428 texts were ascribed to named translators in CSZJJ, but in Fajing, that number increases to 459 for translators down to the end of the Qi (i.e. before Sengyou's time). In other words, Fajing has added at least 31 new ascriptions. As a matter of fact, there are 34 more ascriptions on which Fajing does not agree with CSZJJ, for a total of 65 new ascriptions. Naitō is unable to determine Fajing's sources for these ascriptions, but he notes that in total, they entail, among other things, the addition of nine new "translators" to the record: Tanguo 曇果 [cf. T196], Tankejialuo 曇柯迦羅 [to whom no extant texts are ascribed today], Kang Sengkai 康僧鎧 [cf. T360, T1432, X11], Fajian 法堅 [cf. T495], Zhi Fadu 支法度 [cf. T17, T527], An Faqin 安法欽 [cf. T816, T2042], Fahai 法海 [cf. T1490], Xian gong 先公 [cf. T640, T641], and Xiang gong 翔公 [cf. T234]. Naitō argues that probably five catalogues were in fact extant at Fajing's (and Fei's) time, in addition to GSZ: CSZJJ, Baochang's 寶唱 catalogue, Li Kuo's 李廓 catalogue, Fashang's 法上 catalogue, and the Zhongjing bielu 眾經別錄. Prior scholarship had understood that Baochang collected information from a range of older catalogues, and that Baochang was in turn the proximate source for the use of information from these older catalogues in Fei's LDSBJ (Naitō refers to Tokiwa for this view). Naitō doubts this, because he believes that Baochang only reported 226 ascriptions for sutras, and this number probably did not exceed 300 even when śāstras and vinaya works are taken into account; but this total is too few to account for the profusion of new information reported under the Sui. He notes further that comparison to CSZJJ, the only case in which we can check Fei's information against his source, shows that when LDSBJ says "see such-and-such a catalogue", it only means that the title is listed in the source, not the ascription --- CSZJJ is cited in this manner for texts that CSZJJ itself clearly treats as anonymous. Naitō also discusses Fajing's probable use of Fashang's catalogue. He notes that Fashang stopped at about 568-570, and that Fajing does the same. He takes this fact to indicate that Fajing just took Fashang's information over holus-bolus, and suggests that ascriptions to Fajian, Fahai, and Xian gong were probably added on this basis. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|