| Identifier | T0409 [T] |
| Title | 觀虛空藏菩薩經 [T] |
| Date | [None] |
| Translator 譯 | *Dharmamitra, 曇摩蜜多 [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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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 |
[Silk 2008] Silk, Jonathan. “The Jifayue sheku tuoluoni jing: Translation, Non-Translation, Both or Neither?” JIABS 31, no. 1-2 (2008[2010]): 369-420. — 381 |
"As extended units, both the [七佛八菩薩所說大陀羅尼神咒經 T1332] and the [觀虛空藏菩薩經 T409] were obviously heavily edited, if not outright compiled or composed, in China." Silk cites Strickmann (1996): 73-74, characterising T1332 as an "obvious melange of prototantric elements and Chinese practices. Already, in passing from the bodhisattvas to the planetary spirits, we begin to notice, despite the Indian trappings, that we are truly under the skies of China." Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Fujita 1990] Fujita, Kōtatsu. “The Textual Origins of the Kuan Wu-liang-shou ching: A Canonical Scripture of Pure Land Buddhism.” In Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, edited by Robert Buswell, 149–173. Honolulu: University of Hawai`i Press, 1990. — 155 |
Fujita notes that the Guan Xukongzang pusa jing 觀虛空藏菩薩經 T409 lacks Tibetan and Sanskrit equivalents, as well as any other Chinese version. In this sense, Fujita discusses T409 as one of a whole group of "contemplation sūtras", appearing around the same time in Chinese, which share certain conditions: apparent debts to earlier texts in the Chinese tradition; the absence of parallel texts in other Buddhist languages; etc. Others among this group which have been studied more intensively have been regarded as composed in China or Central Asia. Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
|
No |
[Silk 2008] Silk, Jonathan. “The Jifayue sheku tuoluoni jing: Translation, Non-Translation, Both or Neither?” JIABS 31, no. 1-2 (2008[2010]): 369-420. — 376 n. 23 |
Silk cites Tsukinowa (1971): 123: "There is not one true example of something which could be termed a translation of Dharmamitra" (Silk's translation). Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Silk 2008] Silk, Jonathan. “The Jifayue sheku tuoluoni jing: Translation, Non-Translation, Both or Neither?” JIABS 31, no. 1-2 (2008[2010]): 369-420. |
Silk examines the Ji fayue she ku tuoluoni jing 集法悅捨苦陀羅尼經 [JSTJ] as a test-case in the nature and significance of materials "between translation and composition", and the methodological problems entailed in handling such materials. The JSTJ is extant only in Chinese. It has not survived as an independent text, but was transmitted independently at one time, and is mentioned as a separate text by Fajing, LDSBJ, Yancong, and DZKZM (though in some cases as a biesheng 別生 or chaojing 抄經). Today, the JSTJ is extant only as part of three larger canonical texts: the 觀虛空藏菩薩經 T409; the 七佛八菩薩所說大陀羅尼神咒經 T1332; and the 陀羅尼雜集 T1336. It appears in all three of these texts in the Jin and Koryŏ canons, but in the Qisha lineage, only in T1336. A note in the Koryŏ also says that the JSTJ was not found in the Khitan and Liao versions of T409; and it is not found in the Fangshan stone canon versions of T409 and T1332. Of these texts, T409 is ascribed to Dharmamitra, but Silk cites Tsukinowa suggesting that all ascriptions to this figure are suspect. However, Silk says that "the dating of the text" (to around 442) is nevertheless probably generally correct". This may not help us date the JSTJ, as it may not have contained the JSTJ at the time of composition (note that it is still missing from some versions of the text, as mentioned above). T1332 is first mentioned in the DTNDL; Silk (377) translates a note from KYL noting that it had the same title as a text ascribed to Zhi Qian, but differing in length, and refraining from identifying the two. Silk is inclined to agree, and concludes tentatively that T409 may indeed have existed by the fourth or fifth century, but there is no guarantee that it, too, contained JSTJ at that time. T1336 is ascribed to the early 6th century on the basis of KYL. Silk concludes, as regards the dating of the text, that "the only really firm date we have to work with...is...the first catalogue reference in...593 [=Fajing]," but that "the simple confluence of certain...information, including the presence of the JSTJ in [T409, T1332, and T1336] in one canonical lineage, seems to suggest that JSTJ was established already in the fifth century in China." Thus, the JTSJ is unknown outside China. Silk also notes that there are reasons to regard T409 and T1332 as Chinese compilations or compositions, in their present form. As for T1336, Zhisheng opines (note translated by Silk, 397) that it is a "locally produced abbreviated compilation" 次方抄集. Later in the paper, Silk also finds that the transcribed text of the actual dhāraṇī portion of the text is almost entirely intractable to attempts to discover the underlying Sanskrit. All this evidence might suggest that JSTJ is a pure Chinese composition. In the second part of the paper, however, Silk compares detailed elements in its frame narrative, which he identifies as a version of known narratives about Mahādeva, with other versions known in both India and China. Silk shows that the frame narrative accurately preserves elements known only in some very particular versions of the Mahādeva story in India (particularly in the *Vibhāṣā), but that versions of the narrative containing those elements could not have been known in China in the period when the JSTJ was already in circulation. Silk summarises: "Despite the considerable circumstantial evidence, beginning with sūtra catalogues which are unable to provide any details about the translation of the work, and including the irregular mode of its transmission apparently centrally, though not exclusively, as an intrusion within other works, suggestive of an 'apocryphal' origin, we must conclude that the work nevertheless is, at least in part, genuinely and authentically Indian" (401). Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Chen 2014] Chen, Jinhua. “From Central Asia to Southern China: The Formation of Identity and Network in the Meditative Traditions of the Fifth—Sixth Century Southern China (420—589).” Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 7, no. 2 (2014): 171–202. — 8. n. 27 |
Chen notes that Sengyou records four translations under the name of Dharmamitra 曇摩蜜多: Guan Puxian pusa xingfa jing 觀普賢菩薩行法經 (alt. Puxian guanjing) in one juan, which is an excerpt from the Shen gongde jing 深功德經; Xukongzang guan jing 虛空藏觀經 (alt. Guan Xukongzang pusa jing 觀虛空藏菩薩經) in one juan [probably corresponding to T409?]; Chan miyao 禪祕要 (alt. Chan fayao 禪法要) in three or five juan, “translated in Yuanjia 18 (441)”; and Wumen chanjing yaoyong fa 五門禪經要用法 [T619] in one or two juan. He adds that Dharmamitra’s biography in the Gaoseng zhuan lists his translations as: Chan jing 禪經, Chan fayao 禪法要, Puxian guan 普賢觀, and Xukongzang guan 虛空藏觀, “which apparently correspond to the fourth, the third, the first and the second translations listed in the Chu sanzang ji ji.” See CSZJJ T2145:55.12b27-c4; GSZ T2059:50.343a4-5. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Schuster 1984] Schuster, Nancy. “Yoga-Master Dharmamitra and Clerical Misogyny in Fifth Century Buddhism.” The Tibet Journal 9, no. 4 (1984): 33-46. — 36 |
Only four texts are credited to *Dharmamitra in CSZJJ and GSZ: T619, T613?, T409 and T227. T564 and T310(19) are ascribed to *Dharmamitra in KYL. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
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. — 120-121 |
Pointing to information conveyed in CSZJJ and KYL, Ōno inclines to the belief that the *Vinaya-viniścaya 決定毘尼經 T325 (= Upāli-paripr̥cchā) dates to the E. Jin, probably to the latter part of that period. Ōno also points out that the , ascribed to “the Dunhuang Trepiṭaka” 燉煌三藏 [usually taken to mean Dharmarakṣa --- MR] was widely used in other scriptures. For example, it is reused as the Upāliparipṛcchā 優婆離會 T310(24) in the Ratnakūṭa of Bodhiruci. It also became the first "introduction" chapter 第一序品 of the Pusa shan jie jing 菩薩善戒經 in nine juan, T1582, one section 一節 of which is in turn quoted in the Dasheng xiuxing pusa xing men zhu jing yaoji 大乗修行菩薩行門諸經要集 T847 ascribed to Zhiyan 智嚴 (of the Tang). The rite for contrition before the thirty-five Buddhas 三十五佛懺悔法 of T325 was valued particularly highly in China, as it was an important source in the development of the Guan Xukongzang pusa jing 觀虛空藏菩薩經 T409. Furthermore, two versions of a text entitled Sanshiwu Fo ming jing 三十五佛名經 were produced on the basis of the 三十五佛懺悔法: 1) A scripture recorded in the section of anonymous extant scriptures of CSZJJ as the Sanshiwu Fo ming jing in one fascicle, 三十五佛名經一巻 出決定毘尼經, which is an excerpt scripture of the names of the Buddhas from Śākyamuni 釈迦牟尼佛 to Lianhuaguang shanzhu shaluoshu wang Fo 蓮華光善住沙羅樹王佛. Ōno points out that this text exists in the Hou zai za lu 後載雜錄 of the Korean and Song editions of the Guan Xukongzang pusa jing 觀虛空藏菩薩經 (Ōno states that he made this point already in the fourth section of Chapter One, Part One of the same book). 2) the extant Sanshiwu Fo ming lichan wen 三十五佛名禮懺文 T326 in one juan ascribed to Amoghavajra 不空. The note 出烏波離所問經 added to the title is an alternate title 異名 used in India [sic!]. Ōno states that he will discuss this text later in the same book (Chapter 16 of Part Two). 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. — 402 |
According to Ōno, the Sanshiwu Fo ming jing 三十五佛名經 is an excerpt from the section on the thirty-five Buddhas 三十五佛 in the *Vinayaviniścaya 決定毘尼經 T325 (Upāli-paripṛcchā), which first listed those Buddhas in its section on rites of contrition 懺悔法. The contrition rite with the names of thirty-five Buddhas was so popular, also in India, that the Sanshiwu Fo ming lichan wen 三十五佛名禮懺文 T326 (Upāli-paripṛcchā) was also produced there. The title Sanshiwu Fo ming jing is listed in CSZJJ, with a note stating that it was excerpted from T325 出決定毘尼經. This scripture was not included in the canon since it was an offshoot text 別生, and was eventually considered as missing 缺本. Ōno points out, however, that this text is preserved in the Za lu 雜錄, a collection of excerpt texts 抄出經 attached to the Korean and Song editions of the Ākāśagarbha Contemplation Sūtra 觀虛空藏菩薩經 T409. He infers that the Sanshiwu Fo ming jing was probably attached to T409 because T409 advocated the chanting of the thirty-five Buddha names for redemption, but did not itself originally present those names. Other excerpts were also added to T409 following the Sanshiwu Fo ming jing. 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. — 404 |
Ōno states that the Guoqu wushisan Fo ming jing 過去五十三佛名經 is an excerpt text from the Wushisan jingli 五十三佛敬禮 portion of the Guan Yaowang Yaoshang er pusa jing 觀藥王藥上二菩薩經 T1161. Just like the Sanshiwu Fo ming jing 三十五佛名經, the Guoqu wushisan Fo ming jing is preserved in the appendix of the Korean and Song editions of the Ākāśagarbha Contemplation Sūtra 觀虛空藏菩薩經 T409. The Guoqu wushisan Fo ming jing is listed in the section of extant anonymous scriptures of CSZJJ with a note reading: 出藥王藥上觀亦出如來藏經 (T2145 [LV] 22b6). Although this note says that it is also excerpted from the Tathāgatagarbha-sūtra 出如來藏經, the extant T666 does not contain the names of the 53 Buddhas, while the San jie san qian Fo yuanqi 三劫三千佛縁起 (T446, which bears a note saying it too was excerpted from T1161 出觀藥王藥上經 next to the title) does. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|