| Identifier | T0604 [T] |
| Title | 佛說禪行三十七品經 [T] |
| Date | 後漢 [Hayashiya 1941] |
| Translator 譯 | An Shigao, 安世高 [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 |
|
|
|
Yes |
[Nattier 2008] Nattier, Jan. A Guide to the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Translations: Texts from the Eastern Han 東漢 and Three Kingdoms 三國 Periods. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica X. Tokyo: The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University, 2008. — 55 |
Nattier does not regard the ascription to An Shigao as reliable. The only thing Nattier says of this text (following Zacchetti) is that it "shares a great many peculiar features with T605, and must be directly related to it in some way." Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Kamata 1982] Kamata Shigeo 鎌田茂雄. Chūgoku bukkyō shi, dai ikkan: Shodenki no bukkyō 中国仏教史 第一巻 初伝期末の仏教. Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai, 1982. — 149-154 |
|
Kamata discusses ascriptions to An Shigao, and is willing, on various grounds, to accept the ascriptions for T13, T14, T31, T32, T48, T57, T98, T112, T150A, T150B, T397(17), T602, T603, T607, and T1557. This implies that in Kamata's opinion, the ascriptions for all other texts attributed to An Shigao in T are less reliable, namely, T16, T36, T91, T92, T105, T109, T131, T140, T149, T151, T167, T348, T356, T492, T506, T525, T526, T551, T553, T554, T604, T605, T621, T622, T684, T701, T724, T729, T730, T731, T732, T733, T734, T779, T791, T792, T1467, T1470, T1492, and T2027. This entry lists all the texts in this latter group. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
No |
[Ui 1971] Ui Hakuju 宇井伯寿. Yakukyōshi kenkyū 譯經史研究. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1971. — 444 |
In his Yakukyōshi kenkyū 譯經史研究, Ui maintains that quite a few scriptures ascribed to An Shigao 安世高 in the Taishō are in fact not his work but wrongly ascribed to him by LDSBJ. Ui lists 34 titles in the Taishō ascribed to An Shigao and explains why those ascriptions are incorrect one by one. The Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing 禪行三十七品經 (T604) is one of those 34 titles. Ui’s main reasons for rejecting the ascription of it to An Shigao are as follows: - A Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing in 1 juan is listed in the recompilation of Dao'an's catalogue of anonymous scriptures 新集安公失譯經録. Sengyou also regarded this text as anonymous. - LDSBJ includes a Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing ascribed to An Shigao, stating that the Baochang catalogue 寶唱錄and CSZJJ are its sources, and that the words chan xing 禪行 are sometimes omitted from the title. Ui checked the Shukusatsu daizōkyō mokuroku 縮刷大蔵經目錄 but found no version of the title that did not have 禪行. Thus, Ui infers that Fei thought wrongly that the Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing禪行三十七品經 was the same text as the Sanshiqi pin jing三十七品經 in 1 yuan, already listed in Dao’an’s catalogue. - LDSBJ should more valuable and reliable than Baochang in listing those titles, since LDSBJ uses the entries in Dao’an’s catalogue 綜理衆經目録 (via CSZJJ). - KYL lists a Chan xing sanshiqi jing 禪行三十七經 in 1 juan, ascribed to An Shigao, noting that character 品 may be added to the title, and that the Baochang catalogue 寶唱錄 is the source of ascription. Ui states that he did not find any source from which Zhisheng may have taken the title Chan xing sanshiqi jing (instead of Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing), and that the title Chan xing sanshiqi jing does not make good sense, as sanshiqi pin 三十七品 refers to the thirty-seven bodhipakṣikādharmas 三十七道品. Ui points out that KYL speaks as if it is based upon the Baochang catalogue, but in fact is based on LDSBJ. - The style and content of T604 are clearly not that of An Shigao. Thus, the ascription to An Shigao should be rejected. In his general discussion of titles wrongly ascribed to An Shigao (450-452), Ui emphasizes that those ascriptions were retained in the Taishō due to the direct influence of KYL, which accepted the majority of the ascriptions given by LDSBJ (according to Ui, LDSBJ claims 176 scriptures in 197 fascicles were translated by An Shigao, while KYL states that he translated 95 scriptures in 105 fascicles). Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Zürcher 1959/2007] Zürcher, Erik. The Buddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaptation of Buddhism in Early Medieval China. Third Edition. Leiden: Brill, 1959 (2007 reprint). — 33, 331 n. 82 |
|
According to Zürcher, the ascription of this text to An Shigao is not supported by the earliest external evidence. Zürcher says that Dao'an ascribes 34 texts in total to An Shigao. Setting aside T32 (see below), only 19 of the remaining 30 texts on Dao'an's list are extant: T13, T14, T31, T36, T48, T57, T98, T105, T109, T112, T150a, T150b, T397, T602, T603, T605, T607, T792, and T1557. This implies that other ascriptions to An Shigao in the modern (Taishō) canon are more open to question. This record lists all such texts: T16, T91, T92, T131, T140, T149, T151, T167, T348, T356, T492, T506, T525, T526, T551, T553, T554, T604, T621, T622, T684, T701, T724, T729, T730, T731, T732, T733, T734, T779, T791, T1467, T1470, T1492, T2027. [NOTE: Dao'an ascribed four texts to An Shigao only with hesitation. Three are no longer extant; the only extant text among them is T32. See separate entry on T32.] [NOTE: In a later publication (Zürcher 1991) Zürcher came to the opinion that T1508 should also be ascribed to An Shigao---JN/MR.] Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
No |
[Demiéville 1954] Demiéville, Paul. “La Yogācārabhūmi de Saṅgharakṣa.” BÉFEO 44, no. 2 (1954): 339-436. — 353 n. 1 |
Demiéville states that the ascription to An Shigao of T604 and T605 is uncertain. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Hayashiya 1941] Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎. Kyōroku kenkyū 経録研究. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1941. — 792-798 |
The Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing 禪行三十七品經 is included in Dao'an's list of anonymous scriptures, and was extant at the time of Sengyou 僧祐. Fajing recorded this text as an alternate translation from the Saṃyuktāgama 雜阿含, and in this, was followed by Yancong and Jingtai 靜泰錄. All of these catalogues agree that it is an anonymous scripture. The text has survived as the Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing 禪行三十七品經 T604. LDSBJ 三寶記 lists this Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing as translated by An Shigao 安世高. Hayashiya rejects the reasons LDSBJ offers for this ascription as groundless. However, examining the text, Hayashiya finds that the vocabulary and tone of this text has a striking similarity to that of the Chan xing fa xiang jing 禪行法想經 T605, which was identified as An Shigao’s work in CSZJJ 出三藏記集. Hayashiya refers to his own An Seikō no kiden oyobi yakukyō no kenkyū 安世高訳の紀傳及び譯經の研究 [Iseki: 詳細不明] for detailed discussion on the relationship between these two texts. Hayashiya here rehearses the gist of the argument in that article. According to Hayashiya, the styles of the two texts are so similar that both must have been translated by the same person. Also, since the part of CSZJJ that includes the Chan xing fa xiang jing is taken from Dao’an, and therefore, the claim that the Chan xing fa xiang jing was translated by An Shigao is very reliable. This being the case, the Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing should also be An Shigao's translation. However, Hayashiya also claims that the vocabulary used in the Chan xing fa xiang jing differs significantly from other works by An Shigao. For example, the phrase "yi shi Fo you" 一時佛遊 is used in the Chan xing fa xiang jing, while An Shigao mostly uses "yi shi Fo zai" 一時佛在. The overall tone of the Chan xing fa xiang jing 禪行法想經 is also more sophisticated than that of An Shigao’s other translations. Hayashiya suggets three possible explanations for the above situation. 1) Dao’an was wrong in classifying the Chan xing fa xiang jing as An Shigao's translation; 2) the Chan xing fa xiang jing that was regarded as An Shigao's was a different text from the extant Chan xing fa xiang jing today in the Taishō, or; 3) An Shigao made some changes in his translation style over time, leading to a considerable difference in vocabulary and style between his earlier works and later works. Hayashiya states that it is difficult to determine which of these hypotheses is most plausible. Still, he tentatively takes (2) as most likely. He reasons that An Shigao’s translations have distinctive characteristics, because they are free from influences from other translators, beingthe oldest group of Chinese translations of Buddhist texts [note: An Xuan and Yan Fotiao are also of the same vintage: MR]. Thus, the fact that the style of the Chan xing fa xiang jing is different from that of An Shigao's other translations is significant, because his style is always distinct and clearly noticeable. Also, Hayashiya argues that it is highly unlikely that Dao’an made a mistake in classifying the Chan xing fa xiang jing as An Shigao's. An Shigao might also have changed his style over time, but this view is highly speculative, since in this view, the Chan xing fa xiang jing must be considered to be the only text different from all the other An Shigao translations. Thus, possibility (3) is also unlikely. Hayashiya therefore thinks that the most reasonable scenario is that the Chan xing fa xiang jing that Dao’an classified as by An Shigao was a different text from the version in Taishō, and that older text is lost. Hayashiya points out that it is likely that Dao’an would have classified the Chan xing fa xiang jing as anonymous if the text he saw had been the same as the extant Taishō Chan xing fa xiang jing, since Dao’an classified the Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing, which should have been translated by the same person as the extant Chan xing fa xiang jing, as anonymous. Thus, he takes the view that there must have existed two Chan xing fa xiang jing: one translated by An Shigao, which is lost today; and the surviving text, an anonymous scripture of the Latter Han 後漢 period. The date of composition is clear from the style. Accordingly, the Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing 禪行三十七品經 in the Taishō should also be an anonymous scripture of the Latter Han, translated by the same person as the surviving Chan xing fa xiang jing 禪行法想經. Nonetheless, Hayashiya admits that his view is not decisive, because there is no record of any such text as a Chan xing fa xiang jing translated by An Shigao. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
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. — 859 |
LDSBJ ascribes the Chan xing sanshiqi pin jing 禪行三十七品經 (T604) to An Shigao, but Sakaino points out that this title was listed in among anonymous texts 失譯錄 in Dao’an’s catalogue. In content, the text merely comprises a list of the items 名目 in the rubric of the thirty seven “limbs of awakening” 三十七道品 (*bodhipakṣikāḥ dharmāḥ). Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. |
Hayashiya examines Dao’an’s list of anonymous scriptures, as “recompiled” by Sengyou under the title 新集安公失譯經錄 at CSZJJ T2145 (LV) 16c7-18c2. The Chanxing sanshiqi pin jing 禪行三十七品經 is included in the section of the Dao'an/CSZJJ list for texts listed as extant 有; 16c21. Hayashiya gives, in tabulated form, information about the treatment of the same texts in Fajing T2146, LDSBJ T2034, the KYL T2154, and his own opinion about whether or not the text is extant in T, and if so, where (by vol. and page no.). The above text is identified by Hayashiya with the Chanxing sanshiqi pin jing 禪行三十七品經 T604, attributed in the present canon (T) to An Shigao 安世高. Entry author: Merijn ter Haar |
|
|
|
No |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. |
Hayashiya examines Dao’an’s list of anonymous scriptures, as “recompiled” by Sengyou under the title 新集安公失譯經錄 at CSZJJ T2145 (LV) 16c7-18c2. The Sanshiqi pin jing 三十七品經 is included in the section of the Dao'an/CSZJJ list for texts listed as extant 有; Sengyou adds an interlinear note: 安公云出律經; 16c27. Hayashiya gives, in tabulated form, information about the treatment of the same texts in Fajing T2146, LDSBJ T2034, the KYL T2154, and his own opinion about whether or not the text is extant in T, and if so, where (by vol. and page no.). The above text is considered by Hayashiya to be “missing” (闕) from the Taishō edition of the canon. (But cf. T604, already treated by Hayashiya as related to a separate title in Dao’an’s list, 禪行三十七品經. (no. 4).) Entry author: Merijn ter Haar |
|