| Identifier | T0760 [T] |
| Title | 惟日雜難經 [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 | Zhi Qian 支謙 [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 |
[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. |
Nattier does not regard the ascription to Zhi Qian as reliable. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 29a6 |
In Sengyou's Chu sanzang ji ji, T760 is regarded as an anonymous translation, that is to say, it is listed in the "Newly Compiled Continuation of the Assorted List of Anonymous Translations" 新集續撰失譯雜經錄 (juan 4): 惟日雜難經一卷. 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). — 50, 336 n. 137 |
|
According to Zürcher, Sengyou attributed thirty-six texts to Zhi Qian 支謙, of which twenty-three have survived. This entry lists texts which are ascribed to Zhi Qian in the present Taishō, yet do not appear among Sengyou’s attributions. Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
No |
[Demiéville 1954] Demiéville, Paul. “La Yogācārabhūmi de Saṅgharakṣa.” BÉFEO 44, no. 2 (1954): 339-436. — 370 |
Demiéville argues that the 惟日雜難經 T760 must at least be older than the 師子月佛本生經 T176 [but note that all he will say with confidence of T176 itself is that it must date before the end of the sixth century, i.e. before its first appearance in the catalogues with Fajing and LDSBJ---MR]. He translates the title "Sūtra des apories sur les avaivartika". In CSZJJ T760 is treated as anonymous, and Sengyou reports that it was not listed at all by Dao'an. LDSBJ erroneously splits it into two texts/records on the basis of an error in the title; it treats one of these "texts" as anonymous, and the other it ascribes to Zhi Qian. KYL follows the ascription to Zhi Qian, which Zhisheng derives from LDSBJ. Demiéville himself rejects this ascription. He stats that T176 is "old", and looks like a text of the 3-4 century. It is sometimes listed among the "extracts" [抄?], and indeed, Demiéville states that it has the nature of a "compilation". Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Fajing 594] Fajing 法經. Zhongjing mulu 眾經目錄 T2146. — T2146 (LV) 142a9, 142a13 |
Listed by Fajing among twelve texts that are “excerpted from the śāstras” 右一十二經是眾論抄. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Fei 597] Fei Changfang 費長房. Lidai sanbao ji (LDSBJ) 歷代三寶紀 T2034. — T2034 (XLIX) 55b4 |
In LDSBJ, T760 is listed among anonymous Han texts. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
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. — 67 |
Sakaino briefly mentions that the Weiri za nan jing 惟日雜難經 T760 should correctly be called Weiyue nan jing 惟曰難經, where he takes 惟曰 as a translation of *vaipulya. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
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. — 105-106, 128 |
Sakaino rejects the ascription of the Weiri za nan jing 惟日雜難經 [T760] to Zhi Qian, and claims that probably it is the work of *Lokakṣema. He reasons for this claim can be summarizes as follows: The title Weiriza nan jing 惟日雜難經 should have been written Weiyueza nan jing 惟曰雜難經. The fact that LDSBJ writes Weiyueza nan jing 惟越雜難經 supports the likelihood that the character yue 曰 was originally used, not ri 日. Sakaino also claims that the za 雜 in 惟日雜 is a mistaken form of li 離 (128), and the resulting word weiyueli 惟曰離 is a variation of the transliteration weiyueluo 惟曰羅 (for *vāipulya 方等) (105-106). Furthermore, the character nan 難 in the word weiyuelinan 惟曰離難 [惟日雜難 with 日雜 replaced by 曰離] is a phonetic variant 轉訛 of 離. Thus, the real title of this text may well have been simply Weiyueli jing 惟曰離經. This strongly suggests that T760 is the work of *Lokakṣema, not Zhi Qian. Thus, although this scripture has been ascribed to Zhi Qian since LDSBJ, it is unlikely to be his work. Sakaino states that there are also other reasons to reject the ascription to Zhi Qian, including the fact that the text uses transliterated words for the four fruits of arhatship (“four kinds of śrāvaka) 四種聲聞. However, Sakaino admits that there is a possibility that the text is actually the work of An Shigao rather than *Lokakṣema, since the transcription Sheli 舎利 is used for Śāriputra in the text. This transcription is frequent in An Shigao, but never used by *Lokakṣema. 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. — 66-68 |
According to Sakaino, the 五十校計經 T397(17) was first ascribed to An Shigao, but the text was later incorporated into the 大方等大集經 T397, and as such, ascribed to *Lokakṣema. Sakaino says that the text is indeed *Lokakṣema’s work, not An Shigao’s nor Zhi Qian’s (he suspects the latter, it seems, because of an entry in CSZJJ that gives the alternate title 明度五十校計經, 6a14, where 明度 is a Zhi Qian term). Sakaino briefly suggests that the terminology and style of the text place it close to the so-called Weiri za na jing 惟日雜難經 T760 (which Sakaino says should correctly be called Weiyue na jing 惟曰難經), where he takes 惟曰 as a translation of *vaipulya), and since he takes T760 also as a *Lokakṣema work this is the main grounds for his reascription of T397(17). Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|