Text: T0901; 陀羅尼集經


Identifier T0901 [T]
Title 陀羅尼集經 [T]
Date [None]
Translator 譯 *Atikūṭa?, *Atigupta?, 瞿多, 阿地瞿多 [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


[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



[Gulik 1935]  Gulik, R. H. van. Hayagrīva: The Mantrayānic Aspect of Horse-cult in China and Japan. Leiden: Brill, 1935. — 81-84

Van Gulik regarded the 聖賀野紇哩縛大威怒王立成大神驗供養念誦儀軌法品上卷 T1072A as Japanese apocryphon, because it combines information found in the Dhāraṇīsaṅgraha with passages from T1056, T1214, T901, and passages not included in the canon. This text combined all available canonical material concerning Hayagrīva into one extensive ritual, grouped around a detailed description of Hayagrīva’s maṇḍala.

After some introductory verses, T1072A includes the “beginning of another kalpa” from T1056. Chapter one comprises “shorter and longer citations from T1056, alternating with fragments which have nothing to do with Hayagrīva".

The second chapter largely comprises an elaboration of Hayagrīva’s maṇḍala. The remainder of the chapter is a collection of fragments mainly borrowed from Chapter VI of the Dhāraṇīsaṅgraha, alternating with short, independent passages. One of these (a description of Hayagrīva sitting on a water-buffalo) has been taken from T1214. The final part of this chapter is a synthesis of all passages regarding Hayagrīva from other canonical texts.

Van Gulik acknowledges that it is difficult to trace the origin of the passages which are not drawn from the texts he has identified. From their contents it appears that they could not have been written in Japan, “for the general social conditions alluded to are typically Chinese.” He quotes some examples which he claims could refer to Chinese or Indian conditions, but not Japanese. These passages “could be fragments of a special Chinese Hayagrīva-text, that was lost at an early date.” However, van Gulik concludes that it is more probable that they are remnants of sādhanas and short rituals that have been transmitted in fragments outside the Canon.

The remaining fragments, which have no bearing on Hayagrīva, “are probably to be found hidden somewhere in the canon.”

Entry author: Sophie Florence