| Identifier | T0263 [T] |
| Title | 正法華經 [T] |
| Date | 286 [T263 Colophon] |
| Unspecified | Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 [Kawano 2006] |
| Revised | Kang Nalü 康那律 [T263 Postface] |
| Translator 譯 | Dharmarakṣa 竺法護, 曇摩羅察 [CSZJJ] |
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 |
[Kawano 2006] Kawano Satoshi 河野訓. Shoki kan'yaku butten no kenkyū: Jiku Hōgo o chūshin to shite 初期漢訳仏典の研究 : 竺法護を中心として. Ise: Kōgakkan Daigaku Shuppanbu, 2006. — Table 6, p. 87 |
|
On the basis of a complex examination of the evidence in the catalogues from CSZJJ to KYL (73-92), Kawano arrives at this corpus of 41 texts, which he thinks can most safely be ascribed to Dharmarakṣa and dated, in order to construct a basis for examining Dharmarakṣa's corpus for the development of translation idiom over the course of his career. This note lists that corpus. Kawano arrives at this corpus on the basis of the following criteria: (1) He accepts texts which were probably dated in the original CSZJJ, as represented by the Koryŏ (Kawano shows that the version of CSZJJ received via the Song[-Yuan-Ming] line of transmission includes a large set of problematic additional dates); (2) He accepts texts first dated in Fajing, as long as the date was accepted by Zhisheng in KYL; (3) He rejects texts for which a translation date first appears in LDSBJ; (4) He adds one further text (T810) that can be dated on the basis of a (very early manuscript) colophon. [Note: This list includes four (or five?) lost texts, and a couple of texts ascribed to other translators in the received canon. The number of lost texts is uncertain, because the list includes a 無量壽經, which some modern scholars would be inclined to identify with T360 ascribed to Kang Sengkai 康僧鎧---MR.] Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
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 |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145:55.7b12-8c9 |
|
In the list of texts ascribed to Dharmarakṣa by Dao'an, 28 bear dates. One of these (the 五蓋疑結失行經) has a note saying that Dao'an did not think it looked like a Dharmarakṣa text. This note lists the remaining 27. [Zürcher (2007): 66 suggests that this may be evidence that "in these cases [Dao'an's] attribution was based upon early dated colophons", which may mean that these attributions can be regarded as some of the strongest in the Dharmarakṣa corpus, on external grounds.] 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 |
[T263 Colophon] Anon. Zheng fahua jing ji 正法華經記. — As preserved in CSZJJ |
Oral translation 手執胡經口宣出 ascribed to Dharmarakṣa. Amaneunses 筆受 listed as Nie Chengyuan 聶承遠, Zhang Shiming 張仕明, and Zhang Zhongzheng 張仲政. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[T263 Postface] Anon. Zhengfa hua jing houji 正法華經後記. — T2145 (LV) 56c25-57a2 |
In the eighth month of the year 290 永熙元年 Kang Nalü 康那律 finished copying the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka as translated by Dharmarakṣa in Luoyang 洛陽, and then went with the upāsakas Zhang Jibu 張季博, Dong Jingxuan 董景玄, Liu Changwu 劉長武 and [Liu] Changwen 長文 to Baima-si 白馬, taking the text with them, and there they met with Dharmarakṣa and discussed the text. The process seems to have involved revision of the text (口校古訓...重已校定). 永熙元年八月二十八日。比丘康那律。於洛陽寫正法華品竟。時與清戒界節優婆塞張季博董景玄劉長武長文等。手執經本詣白馬容對與法護。口校古訓講出深義。以九月本齋十四日。於東牛寺中施檀大會講誦此經。竟日盡夜無不咸歡。重已校定, T2145 (LV) 56c25-57a2. Discussed in Fuse (1933): 148-149. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Tsukamoto 1965] Tsukamoto Keishō 塚本啓祥. “Indo shakai to Hoke kyō no kōshō: dharma-bhāṇaka ni kanren shite インド社会と法華経の交渉―dharma-bhāṇakaに関連して―.” In Hoke kyō no shisō to bunka 法華経の思想と文化, edited by Sakamoto Yukio 坂本幸男, 31-66. Kyoto: Heirakuji shoten, 1965. — 50-64 |
Tsukamoto points out that there is a portion unique to Dharmarakṣa’s version of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka (SP) in Chapter 10 (藥王如來品), T263 (IX) 99a28-100b13. He regards this passage as an interpolation in T263 (or its base text). This portion matches content in the “Dharma Offerings” chapter 法供養品 of the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa (VKN), and Tsukamoto gives a tabulated parallel showing this correspondence between T263 and the Weimojie jing 維摩詰經 T474 ascribed to Zhi Qian (51-58). In T263, Tsukamoto argues, this material has a tripartite structure: (A) the superiority of Dharma offerings over all other types of offerings; (B) a story of the past about Baiṣajyarāja Tathāgata 藥王如來, which illustrates this superiority; and (C) verses repeating the gist of the foregoing. (C) is not shared with T474. T263 also adds to the shared material a particular application of the general point about the excellence of Dharma offerings, specifying that among Dharma offerings, further, SP itself is best (58). In support of the suggestion that this material is interpolated into T263, Tsukamoto points out that the title of the chapter (藥王如來品) differs from that in other extant versions of SP, where it is something corresponding to Skt. Dharmabhāṇaka-parivarta. In other versions of the chapter, a bodhisattva called Bhaiṣajyarāja appears at the beginning of the chapter as an interlocutor of the Buddha, but this figure has no necessary relation with the Tathāgata Bhaiṣajyarāja, and Tsukamoto argues that the connection of these two eponymous figures with one another, which is the basis for the introduction of the story in (B), is forced (he notes that in fact, when the name of Bhaiṣajyarāja during the time when he was still a bodhisattva is give in Ch. 22, it is in fact Sarvasattvapriyadarśana). In VKN, by contrast, the story of the past is introduced naturally; further, the episode appears in all three extant versions of VKN (Tsukamoto was writing before the rediscovery of Skt. VKN) (61-62). He thus concludes that this portion was interpolated into a version of SP witnessed for us, among our extant texts, by T263, and the title of the chapter was changed accordingly. However, he does not attempt to adjudicate the question of when or where this portion might have been added to the text (63). 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). — 69, 345 n. 248 |
One of the most important texts translated by Dharmarakṣa is the Zheng fahua jing 正法華經 T263 [Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra]. According to Zürcher, this is the first full translation of the text into Chinese. (The only known earlier version is the anonymous and incomplete Satanfentuoli jing 薩曇分陀利經 T265.) Zürcher states that the translation was completed in three weeks (“September 15-October 6, 286”) at Chang’an. It is also said that Dharmarakṣa recited the translation while holding the Indic manuscript in his hands, the first translator for whom such a feat is recorded, and a testament to his language abilities. Dharmarakṣa’s translation was revised twice, first by the Indian monk Zhu Li 竺力 with the Korean upāsaka Bo Yuanxin 帛元信, and later in March 288. Zürcher suggests that the original manuscript was stored at Chang’an and still existed at the beginning of the seventh century, for which he refers to the preface to Jñānagupta’s edition of the Lotus-sūtra 添品妙法蓮華經 T264. Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
|
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). — 66 |
|
Zürcher states that in the list of texts ascribed to Dharmarakṣa by Dao'an, 29 bear dates [I actually count 28; further, one, the 五蓋疑結失行經, has a note saying that Dao'an did not think it looked like a Dharmarakṣa text, and so I also exclude it---MR]. This note lists the remaining 27. Zürcher suggests that this may be evidence that "in these cases [Dao'an's] attribution was based upon early dated colophons". [This may mean that these attributions can be regarded as some of the strongest in the Dharmarakṣa corpus, on external grounds.] Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
No |
[Demiéville 1954] Demiéville, Paul. “La Yogācārabhūmi de Saṅgharakṣa.” BÉFEO 44, no. 2 (1954): 339-436. — 351 |
This version of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka was translated n 286. However, LDSBJ says that after his arrival in 265, Dharmarakṣa translated a shorter version of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka. Demiéville believes that this is "certainly an error", due to a distinction between the translation title and the transcription title; he notes that Zhisheng already spotted the mistake. [Fei Changfang's original note: 薩芸分陀利經六卷(太始元年譯。見竺道祖晉世雜錄, T2034:49.62a15; Zhisheng: 薩芸芬陀利經六卷. 西晉三藏竺法護太始年譯(第二譯。謹按長房等錄。其正法華是竺法護。太康七年譯。見聶道真錄復云太始元年譯。薩芸芬陀利經六卷。出竺道祖錄同是一經不合再出。名目既殊本復存沒。未詳所以。或可薩芸芬陀利是梵語。正法華是晉名。梵晉俱存。錄家誤也), T2154:55.628c23-26. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[T264 Preface ] Anon. Preface to 添品妙法蓮華經 T264. — T264:9.134c4-11. |
The author of this preface says that the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra of Dharmarakṣa (T263) was translated from an original on palm-leaves, which he had examined. The author also discusses parts of the text that were "missing" in T263 Cf. Demiéville (1954): 315 n. 6. 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. — 261-262 |
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 Zhengfahua jing 正法華經 Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra T263, which Sengyou dated September 15, 286. Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
|
No |
[Suguro 1993] Suguro Shinjō 勝呂信静. Hoke kyō no seiritsu to shisō 法華経の成立と思想. Daitō shuppansha, 1993. — 74-77 |
Suguro discusses four passages confined to one or some of our extant versions of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka. Two of these passages are unique to Dharmarakṣa’s version of the text, 正法華經 T263. 授五百弟子決品 (Ch. 8, T263 (IX) 94b26-95b28) Suguro argues that these materials are narratively unconnected to the remainder of the chapter in each case, and that it is easy to determine that they were added later (74). But he does not speculate on whether the materials were added in India or China, or, if the latter, where and when. Suguro notes overlaps between the material in Ch. 8 and Dharmarakṣa’s Jātaka T154, but he believes that both texts probably derive the material from a common third source (75). He cites Tsukamoto’s work identifying the relationship between Ch. 10 and the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa, but considers that these materials could either have been added to SP from VKN, or, again, derive in both from a common source (75-77). 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). — 343 n. 221 |
|
Sengyou's CSZJJ preserves fifteen prefaces, postfaces and colophons to works ascribed to Dharmarakṣa. This entry lists those works; one, the Śūraṃgamasamādhi-sūtra, is no longer extant. [All other things being equal, the external evidence supporting the ascription to Dharmarakṣa for these texts should therefore be stronger than for other texts. I was unable to find the colophon Zürcher points to for T285---MR.] Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
No |
[Kawano 2006] Kawano Satoshi 河野訓. Shoki kan'yaku butten no kenkyū: Jiku Hōgo o chūshin to shite 初期漢訳仏典の研究 : 竺法護を中心として. Ise: Kōgakkan Daigaku Shuppanbu, 2006. — 209 n. 5 |
Kawano cites Suguro (1993) Chapter 2 Section 2. Suguro reportedly opines that unparalleled sections of two chapters in T263 (授五百弟子決品, Ch. 8, T263 (IX) 94b26 ff.; 藥王菩薩品, Ch. 21, T263 (IX) 125a8 ff) are clearly later interpolations into the text. Suguro therefore does not recognise these portions of the text as the work of Dharmarakṣa. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Kawano 2006] Kawano Satoshi 河野訓. Shoki kan'yaku butten no kenkyū: Jiku Hōgo o chūshin to shite 初期漢訳仏典の研究 : 竺法護を中心として. Ise: Kōgakkan Daigaku Shuppanbu, 2006. — 120, 209 n. 7 |
Kawano refers to Tsukamoto (Keishō) (1965), who has argued that the unparalleled portion on "dharma offerings" found in the 藥王如來品 Ch. 10 of Dharmarakṣa's Saddharmapuṇḍarīka T263 was added on the basis of the 法供養品 Ch. 13 of the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Boucher 2000] Boucher, Daniel. "On Hu and Fan Again: The Transmission of 'Barbarian' Manuscripts to China." JIABS 23, no. 1 (2000): 7-28. — 12-14 |
Boucher argues that Dharmarakṣa’s Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra T263 was translated from a Kharoṣṭhī manuscript. He argues that this is evident from “confusions in the Chinese renderings.” In the first chapter there are several instances where Maitreya is referred to as Ajita. There are two references to Ajita in the Sanskrit passage, but only one in the Chinese; furthermore, Dharmarakṣa translates “eighty tathāgatas” in one line, and in the next, writes of twenty thousand. However, there is no mention of “eighty tathāgatas” in the Indic passage. Boucher suggests that if Dharmarakṣa had been working from a Kharoṣṭhī text, ajita would likely have read *ayita (due to a Prakrit development of “intervocalic j replaced by y”) which leaves the possibility that Dharmarakṣa misread ya as śa and understood aśīti (eighty). The second confusion also involves graphically similar akṣaras, the mistranslation from putrā to sūtra (jingli) suggests that Dharmarakṣa misread “pu” for “su” (this confusion could have been compounded by the lack of long vowels in Kharoṣṭhī). The colophon to this text describes the text as a hu jing 胡經 (Hu sūtra), which connects this example to Boucher’s wider argument for a connection between the term “hu” and Kharoṣṭhī manuscripts. Boucher cites Seishi Karashima, The Textual Study of the Chinese Versions of the Saddharmapuṇḍarikasūtra in light of the Sanskrit and Tibetan Versions (Tokyo: The Sankibo Press, 1992). Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
|
No |
[Suzuki 1995] Suzuki Hiromi 鈴木裕美. “Koyaku kyōten ni okeru yakugo ni tsuite: Jiku Hōgo yakushutsu kyōten wo chūshin toshite 古訳経典における訳語について―竺法護訳出経典を中心として.” IBK 43, no. 2 (1995): 198-200. |
|
Suzuki regards the texts listed in this entry as genuine Dharmarakṣa translations. She groups them into five types, on the basis of stylistic features: A: T222, T588 , T636 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. — 129 |
The preface 經序 of T264 states that the first parts of the “Five Hundred Śrāvakas” 五百弟子 and “Dharma Preacher” 法師 chapters in T262 are lacking in T263 and T264, but they are in fact not missing in the extant versions. Ōno refers to his own paper, "Hokke kyō hon’yaku no shomondai" 法華經翻譯の諸問題, for the details of the relations between those alternate translations. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[Kawano 1997] Kawano Satoshi 河野訓. "Shō hokke kyo 'Yakuō nyorai bon' to Yuima kyō 'Hō kuyō bon' ni tsuite 『正法華経』薬王如来品と 『維摩経』法供養品について." IBK 46, no. 1 (1997-1998): 242-246. https://doi.org/10.4259/ibk.46.242. |
Kawano investigates the first half of Dharmarakṣa’s "Yaowang rulai pin" 藥王如來品 in his Zheng fahua jing 正法華經 T263, a parallel to the "Fashi pin" 法師品 in Kumārajīva’s Miaofa lianhua jing 妙法蓮華經, in light of the parts that are absent in the Sanskrit text. Kawano argues that a portion found in the "Yaowang rulai pin" but absent from the "Fashi pin" seems to be Dharmarakṣa’s own insertion. The inserted part concerns the Dharma offering 法供養 of Prince Shangai 善蓋太子, which bears a resemblance to the "Fa gongyang pin" 法供養品 in the Weimo jing 維摩經. However, it is certain that it is not a direct citation from Zhiqian’s 支謙 Weimojie jing 維摩詰經 T474, an earlier translation. Kawano concludes that it is more plausible that the insertion in T263 is adapted from Dharmarakṣa’s own Weimo jing rather than from Zhiqian’s T474, considering that Zhiqian’s "Fa gongyang pin" and Dharmarakṣa’s "Yaowang rulai pin" are alternate translations of the same text 同本の異譯. Entry author: Chia-wei Lin |
|
|
|
No |
[Jiu lu CSZJJ] Jiu lu 舊錄 as reported by CSZJJ 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 7b14 |
Sengyou cites a/the Jiu lu 舊錄 as a source for information about the 正法華經: 正法華經十卷(二十七品舊錄云正法華經或云方等正法華經太康七年八月十日出) Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Jiu lu CSZJJ] Jiu lu 舊錄 as reported by CSZJJ 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 7b12-9c4 |
|
In the section of the 新集經論錄, CSZJJ Fascicle 2, on Dharmarakṣa, Sengyou lists the following 32 texts for which a/the Jiu lu 舊錄 is cited in evidence in interlinear notes. He cites the Jiu lu for information about alternate titles. 賢劫經七卷, cf. T425 Sengyou also cites the Jiu lu for the 超日明經 T638, which, according to his information, was translated initially by Dharmarakṣa and then revised and abridged by Nie Chengyuan 聶承遠. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
No |
[Karashima 2015] Karashima, Seishi. "Who Composed the Mahāyāna Scriptures? The Mahāsāṃghikas and Vaitulya Scriptures." ARIRIAB XVIII (2015): 113-162. — 123-125 |
As part of an argument that genre identifiers in titles shifted over time from vaitulya to vaipulya (and beyond, to *mahāyānasūtra, etc.), Karashima cites the evidence of several internal titles or self-references given to SP in Dhr's T263 (Karashima also gives equivalents in Skt manuscripts): 《正法華》方等, Saddharmapuṇḍarīkaṃ nāma dharmaparyāyaṃ; He also notes that Sengyou's CSZJJ refers to the text by the title 方等正法華經. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|