Text: T0822; 佛說諸法勇王經

Summary

Identifier	T0822 [T]
Title	佛說諸法勇王經 [T]
Date	Song-Qi 宋齊 [Hayashiya 1945]
Unspecified	Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 [Hayashiya 1945]
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).

Assertions

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.	T0822; 佛說諸法勇王經	Entry author: Michael Radich Edit	Title: 佛說諸法勇王經 People: *Dharmamitra, 曇摩蜜多 (translator 譯) Identifier: T0822
No	[Hayashiya 1945] Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎, Iyaku kyōrui no kenkyū‚ 異譯經類の研究, Tokyo: Tōyō bunko, 1945. — 436-454	T0407; 虛空藏菩薩神呪經 T0564; 佛說轉女身經 T0814; 佛說象腋經 T0822; 佛說諸法勇王經	According to Hayashiya, the Xiang ye jing 象腋經 T814 (Hastikakṣyā-sūtra) was listed first in Fajing with no ascription. Hayashiya maintains that this text was translated in the Song-Qi 宋齊 period, since it did not appear in CSZJJ (438-439), that the ascription of it to *Dharmamitra 曇摩蜜多 shown in the Taishō is most likely to be incorrect, and the text should be reclassified as an anonymous sūtra. The gist of Hayashiya’s argument can be shown as follows: The ascription of 814 to Dharmamitra was first given by LDSBJ, followed by DZKZM, KYL, and the Taishō. In LDSBJ, 6 titles are newly ascribed to Dharmamitra, including the Xiang ye jing. Hayashiya examines LDSBJ’s claim that the Li Kuo catalogue 李廓錄 (Wei shi zhongjing mulu 魏世衆經目錄) ascribed those titles to Dharmamitra, and rejects the claim as highly unlikely, because if there had been such ascriptions in Li Kuo’s catalogue, Fajing would have mentioned them (446-447). Hayahiya then compares six existing texts ascribed to Dharmamitra (listed below), two of which have been ascribed to him since CSZJJ, the others being ascribed to him first by LDSBJ: Ascribed to Dharmamitra by CSZJJ Guan Puxian pusa xingfa jing 觀普賢菩薩行法經 T277 Guan Xukongzang pusa jing 觀虚空藏菩薩經 T409 Ascribed to Dharmamitra by LDSBJ Xukongzang pusa shenzhou jing 虚空藏菩薩神呪經 T407 Zhuan nü shen jing 轉女身經 T564 Xiang ye jing 象腋經 T814 Zhufayong wang jing 諸法勇王經 T822 Hayahiya claims that texts translated after the time of Kumārajīva 鳩摩羅什, such as these ones, use largely similar vocabulary to one another, since Kumārajīva largely standardised the terms used in scriptural translations. This being the case, it is not easy to tell anything significant about the ascription of these texts from vocabulary alone, except that they were translated probably in the same period (447-448). However, Hayashiya further examines the details of tone in those texts and concludes that the four texts ascribed to Dharmamitra by LDSBJ (T407, T564, T814, T822) are written with a different tone from T277 and T409, and therefore should not be treated as his works. Although Hayashiya does not exclude the possibility that one or two of the four texts ascribed to Dharmamitra by LDSBJ do happen to be authentic, he asserts that, since LDSBJ does not provide any source or evidence for the ascriptions, it is much more reasonable to reclassify those texts, including T814, as anonymous scriptures of the Song-Qi 宋齊 period (448-450). Entry author: Atsushi Iseki Edit	People: Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 (unspecified) Date: Song-Qi 宋齊
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	T0227; 小品般若波羅蜜經 T0407; 虛空藏菩薩神呪經 T0409; 觀虛空藏菩薩經 T0564; 佛說轉女身經 T0613; 禪祕要法經 T0619; 五門禪經要用法 T0814; 佛說象腋經 T0822; 佛說諸法勇王經	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 Edit

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.

T0822; 佛說諸法勇王經

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

Title: 佛說諸法勇王經
People: *Dharmamitra, 曇摩蜜多 (translator 譯)
Identifier: T0822

[Hayashiya 1945] Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎, Iyaku kyōrui no kenkyū‚ 異譯經類の研究, Tokyo: Tōyō bunko, 1945. — 436-454

According to Hayashiya, the Xiang ye jing 象腋經 T814 (Hastikakṣyā-sūtra) was listed first in Fajing with no ascription. Hayashiya maintains that this text was translated in the Song-Qi 宋齊 period, since it did not appear in CSZJJ (438-439), that the ascription of it to *Dharmamitra 曇摩蜜多 shown in the Taishō is most likely to be incorrect, and the text should be reclassified as an anonymous sūtra. The gist of Hayashiya’s argument can be shown as follows:

The ascription of 814 to Dharmamitra was first given by LDSBJ, followed by DZKZM, KYL, and the Taishō. In LDSBJ, 6 titles are newly ascribed to Dharmamitra, including the Xiang ye jing. Hayashiya examines LDSBJ’s claim that the Li Kuo catalogue 李廓錄 (Wei shi zhongjing mulu 魏世衆經目錄) ascribed those titles to Dharmamitra, and rejects the claim as highly unlikely, because if there had been such ascriptions in Li Kuo’s catalogue, Fajing would have mentioned them (446-447). Hayahiya then compares six existing texts ascribed to Dharmamitra (listed below), two of which have been ascribed to him since CSZJJ, the others being ascribed to him first by LDSBJ:

Ascribed to Dharmamitra by CSZJJ
Guan Puxian pusa xingfa jing 觀普賢菩薩行法經 T277
Guan Xukongzang pusa jing 觀虚空藏菩薩經 T409

Ascribed to Dharmamitra by LDSBJ
Xukongzang pusa shenzhou jing 虚空藏菩薩神呪經 T407
Zhuan nü shen jing 轉女身經 T564
Xiang ye jing 象腋經 T814
Zhufayong wang jing 諸法勇王經 T822

Hayahiya claims that texts translated after the time of Kumārajīva 鳩摩羅什, such as these ones, use largely similar vocabulary to one another, since Kumārajīva largely standardised the terms used in scriptural translations. This being the case, it is not easy to tell anything significant about the ascription of these texts from vocabulary alone, except that they were translated probably in the same period (447-448). However, Hayashiya further examines the details of tone in those texts and concludes that the four texts ascribed to Dharmamitra by LDSBJ (T407, T564, T814, T822) are written with a different tone from T277 and T409, and therefore should not be treated as his works. Although Hayashiya does not exclude the possibility that one or two of the four texts ascribed to Dharmamitra by LDSBJ do happen to be authentic, he asserts that, since LDSBJ does not provide any source or evidence for the ascriptions, it is much more reasonable to reclassify those texts, including T814, as anonymous scriptures of the Song-Qi 宋齊 period (448-450).

Entry author: Atsushi Iseki

Edit

People: Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 (unspecified)
Date: Song-Qi 宋齊

[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

Edit