| Identifier | T0623 [T] |
| Title | 佛說如來獨證自誓三昧經 [T] |
| Date | [None] |
| Unspecified | Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 [Sakaino 1935] |
| Translator 譯 | Dharmarakṣa 竺法護, 曇摩羅察 [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 |
[Mei 1996] Mei Naiwen 梅廼文. “Zhu Fahu de fanyi chutan 竺法護的翻譯初探.” Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal 中華佛學學報 9 (1996): 49-64. — 54 n. 26 |
|
Mei begins with the 76 texts ascribed to Dharmarakṣa in the present Taishō which also appear in Sengyou. She then eliminates eight for the following reasons: five are listed as lost by Sengyou's time (T182, T288, T496, T558, T1301); T1301, moreover, contains details that makes it appear as if it may have been composed in China; T103 and T453 have been regarded as dubious by modern scholars (Gao Mingdao and Yinshun); and Sengyou's description of the 佛為菩薩五夢經 that he ascribes to Dharmarakṣa does not match T310(4). This leaves 68 texts Mei thinks can reliably be matched against Sengyou. This entry lists those 68 texts. [Note: Mei erroneously gives the number T627 for what is properly T636---MR.] Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
No |
[Boucher 1996] Boucher, Daniel. "Buddhist Translation Procedures in Third-Century China: A Study of Dharmarakṣa and his Translation Idiom." PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1996. — 283 |
In the appendix to his dissertation Boucher provides a list of ninety-five texts attributed to Dharmarakṣa by Sengyou in his Chu sanzang ji ji出三藏記集 T2145, along with a note on relevant scholarship. Among these texts is the Duzheng zishi sanmei jing 如來獨證自誓三昧經 T623. He adds that the text is also known as Rulai duzheng zishi sanmei jing 如來獨證自誓三昧經. Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
|
No |
[Fei 597] Fei Changfang 費長房. Lidai sanbao ji (LDSBJ) 歷代三寶紀 T2034. — T2034 (XLIX) 51b5, 63b11, 71c11 |
One title clearly related to T622 and T623 is ascribed to An Shigao in LDSBJ, with no particular source. The present attribution of T622 to An Shigao probably derives from this record. Another text with a similar title is ascribed to Dharmarakṣa in LDSBJ, with no particular source; cf. T623, and ascriptions of similar titles to Dharmarakṣa in CSZJJ and Fajing. However, the title 如來獨證自誓三昧經 (which is closer to T623) is also ascribed to *Gītamitra in LDSBJ, with an anomalous note saying it is the second translation (rather than the third): 第二出). Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Saitō 2013 ] Saitō Takanobu 齊藤隆信. Kango butten ni okeru ge no kenkyū 漢語仏典における偈の研究. Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 2013. — 333 |
As part of a broader examination of rhyming verse in the Dharmarakṣa corpus, the general thrust of which is to argue that such rhymed verse is largely atypical of Dharmarakṣa, Saitō states that T623 has close similarities to 自誓三昧經 T622 ascribed to An Shigao 安世高. As such, he urges, the ascription of the rhymed verse in these texts cannot be determined until we clarify their chronological order. [In other words, Saitō seems to be saying that we should consider the possibility that the rhymed verse in T623 somehow derives from T622 --- whether or not the ascription of T622 to An Shigao is to be accepted. --- MR] 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. — 71-75 |
Sakaino maintains that the following 13 texts ascribed to An Shigao in LDSBJ were taken from a list of Dharmarakṣa’s works in CSZJJ, and calls the resulting information "erroneous and confused" 誤傳混同: - 溫室洗浴眾僧經 [cf. T701 ascribed to 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. — 851-852 |
The Zi shi sanmei jing 自誓三昧經 (T622 ascribed to An Shigao) and the Rulai du zheng zi shi sanmei jing 如來獨證自誓三昧經 (T623 ascribed to Dharmarakṣa) are alternate versions of the same text. Sakaino states that "there are reasons that would lead us to imagine" that T622 should most likely be reascribed to Dharmarakṣa and T623 to Zhi Qian respectively [without stating those reasons explicitly]. He holds that T622 is clearly not An Shigao’s work. [Sakaino does not talk about this issue of ascription any further, and instead moves on to explain their 戒-related contents --- 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. — 106-110 |
Ōno compares several passages in the so-called *Kāśyapasaṃvara-sūtra(?) 迦葉禁戒經 T1469, ascribed to Juqu Jingsheng, the Rulai du zheng zi shi sanmei jing 如来獨證自誓三昧經 T623, ascribed to Dharmarakṣa, and the Zi shi sanmei jing 自誓三昧經 T622, ascribed to An Shigao, in order to illustrate that the text of T1469 is used in T623, while T622 is an alternate version of T623 (the comparison of quoted passages is presented on 109). Ōno claims that T623 must have been written in China, as it quotes T1469, which Ōno regards as itself an excerpt text compiled in China [see separate CBC@ entry on T1469]. T623 has been ascribed incorrectly to Dharmarakṣa since Dao’an’s catalogue. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[Fang and Lu 2023] Fang Yixin 方一新 and Lu Lu 盧鹭. “Jin shiyu nian cong yuyan jiaodu kaobian keyi Fojing chengguo de huigu yu zhanwang” 近十余年從語言角度考辨可疑佛經成果的回顧與展望.” Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences Online Edition), Jan. 2023: 1–24. — 4 |
In a survey article of scholarship on questions of attribution in the Chinese canon published in the last decade, Fang and Lu state that Karashima argues that either the Zishi sanmei jing 自誓三昧經 T622 or the Rulai duzheng zishi sanmei jing 如來獨證自誓三昧經 T623 is a translation by Dharmarakṣa, and the one that was not translated by him is a slightly modified version based on that by him. They refer to Karashima Seishi 辛島靜志. “Fahua jing de wenxianxue yanjiu –– Guanyin de yuyi jieshi” 《法華經》的文獻學研究——觀音的語義解釋. In Zhonghua wenshi luncong 中華文史論叢, edited by Zhonghua wenshi luncong bianji bu 中華文史論叢編輯部, 199–229. Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2009. See 203-204 n. 3. Entry author: Mengji Huang |
|