| Identifier | T1462 [T] |
| Title | 善見律毘婆沙 [T] |
| Date | [None] |
| Translator 譯 | Saṃghabhadra, 僧伽跋陀羅 [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 |
[Ñāṇatusita 2014] Ñāṇatusita, Bhikkhu. "Translations or Adaptations? Chinese Hybrid Translations of Vinaya Texts", Journal of Buddhist Studies vol. XII (2014–2015): 123- 187. |
Bhikkhu Ñāṇatusita examines the Shanjian lü piposha 善見律毘婆沙 T1462 (otherwise referred to as Yiqie shanjian lü piposha 一切善見律毘婆沙) in considerable detail. He concludes that the text is a "partial, abridged translation of the Samantapāsādikā, the Vinaya commentary of the Mahāvihāra Theravādins of Sri Lanka, into which the translator inserted materials from other Pāli texts (perhaps from earlier, now lost Chinese translations) and also adapted it in parts to fit the Chinese translation of the Vinaya of another Buddhist school, the Dharmaguptakas." Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
|
No |
[Pinte 2010] Pinte, Gudrun. “On the Origin of Taishō 1462, the Alleged Translation of the Pāli Samantapāsādikā.” ZDMG 160 (2010): 435-449. |
Pinte summarises the history of scholarship on the Shanjian lü piposha 善見律毘婆沙 T1462. Takakusu (1896) was the first to assert that it was a translation of the Samantapāsādikā; followed by studies by Mizuno and Nagai; translations of the Introduction by Jayawickrama and Durt (separately); and a translation of the full text by Bapat and Hirakawa (together). Demiéville (in “A propos du Concile de Vaiśalī”) proposed that T1462 might be a translation of a prototype of the Pali text, rather than a direct translation of a version of the Pali text now extant. Lottermoser proposed that the text was from a different version of the Vinaya commentary. Bechert agreed, suggesting “an Abhayagirivihāra equivalent for the Pāli Samantapāsādikā as an alternative source for the Chinese”. Working further in the direction indicated by Bechert, Heirman has concluded that an Abhayagirivihāra influence is not unlikely, but too little is known about the Abhayagirivihārins to be sure. Bapat and Hirakawa tried to explain discrepancies between T1462 and Pāli by Dharmaguptaka influence, but Heirman argues that on other points, Sarvāstivādin influence is just as plausible. Pinte's own study focuses on the Chinese title, aiming to explain how modern scholars came to identify it with the Pāli title. Towards the end of her study, Pinte suggests that Shanjian 善見 might refer to the capital of Jibin 罽賓 (as it does in the Annals of the Northern Wei). She links this suggestion to possible connections between T1462 and Dharmayaśas, who was from Jibin. Pinte proposes that the source text for T1462 might be a text referred to as the 毘婆沙律, which is said in GSZ to have been recited by Dharmayaśas when he arrived in Canton in 402 at the age of 85; on the strength of his expertise in this text, he was referred to as “Mahāvibhāṣā (以晉隆安中初達廣州住白沙寺。耶舍善誦毘婆沙律。人咸號為大毘婆沙。時年已八十五; T2059:50.329b27-29). According to KYL, *Saṃghabhadra 僧伽跋陀羅 translated T1462 in 488-489 [T2154:55.535c21-23, which Pinte does not question; in fact, the ultimate source of this assertion is CSZJJ T2145 [LV] 13b20-23---MR]. Pinte concludes: “It becomes very likely that this Piposha lü might be the source from which T1462 has been translated into Chinese at the end of the fifth century in Canton” (448). This would yield a gap of eighty years or so between the time of Dharmayaśas and the actual translation of the text. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Chen 2005] Chen, Jinhua. "Some Aspects of the Buddhist Translation Procedure in Early Medieval China: With Special References to a Longstanding Misreading of a Keyword in the Earliest Extant Buddhist Catalogue in East Asia." Journal Asiatique 293.2 (2005): 603-662. — 657-661 |
|
Chen lists thirty-three texts discussed in Sengyou's Chu sanzang ji ji for which dates are given, but where those dates cannot be corroborated by any "translation documents" [meaning primary sources discussing circumstances etc. of translation, such as colophons]: Fangdeng nihuan jing 方等般泥洹經 T378; Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
No |
[Zhisheng 730] Zhisheng 智昇. Kaiyuan shijiao lu (KYL) 開元釋教錄 T2154 — T2154:55.535c21-23 |
Translated by *Saṃghabhadra 僧伽跋陀羅 and Sengyi 僧禕 in 488-489 永明六年 in the Veṇuvana monastery 竹林寺 in Canton 廣州. Cf. Pinte (2010): 435 n. 1. In fact, this ascription (including other details) is first seen in LDSBJ. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Fei 597] Fei Changfang 費長房. Lidai sanbao ji (LDSBJ) 歷代三寶紀 T2034. — T2034:49.95c1-3 |
Translated by *Saṃghabhadra 僧伽跋陀羅 and Sengyi 僧猗 in 488-489 永明六年 in the Veṇuvana monastery 竹林寺 in Canton 廣州. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 13b20-23 |
Sengyou says that the 善見毘婆沙律 T1462 (for which he gives the alternate title 毘婆沙律) was translated in Yongming 永明 7 (489 CE), in 18 fascicles, under emperor Xu of the (Southern) Qi 齊武帝, in the Veṇuvana monastery 竹林寺 in Guangzhou, by *Saṃghabhadra 僧伽跋陀羅, at the request of Sengyi 釋僧猗. 善見毘婆沙律十八卷(或云毘婆沙律齊永明七年出) 右一部。凡十八卷。齊武帝時。沙門釋僧猗。於廣州竹林寺。請外國法師僧伽跋陀羅譯出. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|