| Identifier | T1512 [T] |
| Title | 金剛仙論 [T] |
| Date | [None] |
| Unspecified | Bodhiruci, 菩提流支, 菩提留支 [Ono and Maruyama 1933-1936] |
| Translator 譯 | Bodhiruci, 菩提流支, 菩提留支 [T] |
| [orally] "translate/interpret" 傳語, 口宣[...言], 傳譯, 度語 | Buddhaśānta, 佛陀扇多 [Sakaino 1935] |
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 |
[Funayama 2006] Funayama Tōru 船山徹. "Masquerading as Translation: Examples of Chinese Lectures by Indian Scholar-Monks in the Six Dynasties Period," Asia Major 19, no. 1-2 (2006): 39-55. — 48-50 |
Funayama concludes that Jingang xian lun 金剛仙論 T1512 is a commentary on Vasubandhu’s Jingang bore boluomi jing lun 金剛般若波羅蜜經論 T 1511 and is an example of a lecture text. Traditionally, the text is a translation by “Tripiṭaka master Bodhiruci.” However, Funayama argues that on the basis of elements particular to Chinese Buddhism found in the text, such as the notion of sanshi xin 三十心, an explanation of the meaning of the title, and a passage quoted from Da zhidu lun大智度論 T 1509, the text is some kind of lecture made for a Chinese audience. 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]. — vol. 3, pp. 475-476 |
According to Tsujimori Yōshū(?) 辻森要修, the Jingang xian lun 金剛仙論 T1512 ascribed to Bodhiruci 菩提流支 is not a translation of a Sanskrit original text in a proper sense, since it contains a number of passages that cannot be translated from another language. Tsujimori states that T1512 is probably Bodhiruci’s own work explaining what Jingangxian = *Vajrārṣi 金剛仙 taught, which is why T1512 is not included in the scriptural catalogues, despite its apparent popularity. Tsujimori demonstrates these points by quoing KYL and the 金剛般若經贊述 T1700. He also points out that T1512 is probably not the original version of Bodhiruci's text, since it has some oddities, such as a theory of the "eight wisdoms" 八般若 that is different from Bodhiruci’s own theory as reported by Jizang 吉藏; and the lack of terminological unity. 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. — 655-656 |
|
Sakaino states that Ratnamati 勒那摩提, Bodhiruci 菩提流支, and *Buddhaśānta 佛陀扇多 were contemporaries in the Northern Dynasty period, and that it is recorded that Ratnamati started translating scriptures in China first, followed by Bodhiruci, and then by Buddhaśānta. However, Sakaino claims that Buddhaśānta probably came to China earlier than the other two. Sakaino gives the following support for this claim: For translation works ascribed to these three figures, the tradition rarely reports an oral translator/interpreter 傳語, even though an interpreter should have been necessary. The preface of the Daśabhūmika 十地[經]論 T1522, however, states that Ratnamati and Bodhiruci were the translators 譯出, and Buddhaśānta was the oral translator/interpreter 傳語. From this, Sakaino infers that Buddhaśānta was the person who worked as the oral translator/interpreter 傳語 for the other two in other cases as well. Sakaino infers that Buddhaśānta must have arrived in China earlier than the other two, and thereby had longer to learn the language. This entry is associated with all texts ascribed to the trio, to which this suggestion might apply. 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. — 14 |
In an article surveying scholarship on questions of attribution in the Chinese canon published in the last decade, Fang and Lu state that Zhang Guoliang argues that the wording in the Jingang xian lun 金剛仙論 T1512 is mostly not found in the translations of Northern Wei dynasty, but they appear frequently in the translations produced during Sui and Tang periods. They refer to Zhang Guoliang 張國良. “Yuan Wei yijing yiwen yanjiu” 元魏譯經異文研究. PhD diss., Hunan shifan daxue 湖南師範大學 (2016): 232–234. Entry author: Mengji Huang |
|