| Identifier | Sūtra of Trapuṣa and Bhallika [Lai 1987] |
| Title | Tiwei Boli jing, 提謂波利經 [Lai 1987] |
| Date | 453-464 [Lai 1987] |
| Author | Tanjing 曇靖 [Lai 1987] |
| Preferred? | Source | Pertains to | Argument | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Yes |
[Lai 1987] Whalen W. Lai, “The Earliest Folk Buddhist Religion in China: T'i-wei Po-li Ching and Its Historical Significance,” in Buddhist and Taoist Practice in Medieval Chinese Society: Buddhist and Taoist Studies II, ed. David W. Chappell (Honolulu: Asian Studies at Hawai`i , University of Hawai`i Press, 1987), 11–35. |
Chinese indigenous sūtra composed by Tanjing 曇靖 of the Northern Wei dynasty during the reign period of Emperor Xiaowu of the Liu-Song dynasty (453–464); two fascicle(s). Makita Tairyō reconstructed the text based on Dunhuang manuscripts: Pelliot 3732 and Stein 2051 and the citation found in the Fayuan zhulin (T 2122.53.932b01–933a). See Gikyō kenkyū [Kyoto: Kyōto Daigaku Jinbun Kagaku Kenkyūjo, 1976], pp.184–206. Commonly known by the short title of 提謂經. Composed in China. See also Ziegler (2001): 104-111. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Funayama 2013] Funayama Tōru 船山徹. Butten wa dō Kan’yaku sareta no ka: sūtora ga kyōten ni naru toki 仏典はどう漢訳されたのか スートラが経典になるとき. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten: 2013. — 125-127 |
Funayama discusses some of the evidence that has led scholars to conclude that the text is apocryphal, including five phases 五行 thinking. 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). — 435 n. 97 |
Zürcher writes that the Tiwei Boli jing 提謂波利經 (Sūtra of Trapuṣa and Bhallika) is a popular “apocryphon” written in 460 CE by “the famous organiser of the Northern Church” Tanyao. The text includes a “bizarre classificatory system” wherein the “five Buddhist commandments” are made to correspond to five sacred mountains, five intestines, five planets, five (mythical) emperors etc. Zürcher sees this as an example of the “explanation of Buddhist ideas in terms of traditional Chinese cosmology”. Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
|
No |
[Hou 2015] Hou Guangxin 侯広信, " "Daii hari kyō no Dōkyō kyōten ni taisuru eikyō: Taijō Rōkun kai kyō o rei toshite『提謂波利経』の道教経典に対する影響 : 『太上 老君戒経』を例として." Musashino daigaku ningen kagaku kenkyūjo nenpō 武蔵野大学人間科学研究所年報, 4 (2015): 110-130. — 116-117 |
Modern scholars agree that the Tiwei Boli jing 提謂波利経 is an apocryphal work composed by a certain Tanjing 曇靖 between 453-464, just after the first great persecution of Buddhism by Tai Wudi in 446. Nothing more is known about this Tanjing. Entry author: Nobumi Iyanaga |
|
|
|
No |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 34c20, 39a24-25 |
According to CSZJJ, it seems that two separate recensions existed of the Tiwei Boli jing 提謂波利経, one in one scroll and another in two scrolls. In his "newly compiled sequel to the catalogue of assorted anonymous scriptures" 新集續撰失譯雜經録第一, Sengyou first records a version in one fascicle (提謂經一卷, T2145 (LV) 34c20). However, in his "newly compiled catalogue of assorted dubious sutras and inauthentic works" 新集疑經僞撰雜録第三, Sengyou says that the text has two fascicles, and states in a note that it was composed by Tanjing under the (Liu) Song emperor Xiaowu (提謂波利經二卷[舊別有提謂經一卷] 右一部。宋孝武時。北國比丘曇靖撰, T2145 (LV) 39a24-25). Entry author: Nobumi Iyanaga |
|
|
|
No |
[Shinden 2016] Shinden Yū 新田優. "Tonkō-bon 'Daii Hari-kyō' shohon no kankei ni tsuite. Fu. Inbun ichiran, 'Daii Hari kyō' honbun inbun taishō" 敦煌本『提謂波利經』諸本の關係について——附「引文一覧」「『提謂波利經』本文・引文對照」. Sengokuyama Bukkyōgaku ronshū 仙石山佛教學論集, 8 (2016): 37-127 . |
Shinden gives a complete edition of all the extent Dunhuang and Turfan manuscripts of the original text of the Tiwei Boli jing, along with a very extensive list of citations of the sūtra in the subsequent Buddhist literature in China and Japan. Tsukamoto (1941): 325-335/13-23 had found 21 quotations; Shinden's list has 43! However, Tsukamoto's article was written when the original text remains of the sūtra found in Tunhuang (and later in Turfan) manuscripts were still unknown. Cited: Entry author: Nobumi Iyanaga |
|
|
|
No |
[Iyanaga 2018] Iyanaga Nobumi 彌永信美. "Ikiteiru butsuzō. 'Shōjin no butsuzō' shisō wo megutte 生きている仏像——「生身の仏像」思想をめぐって." Gendai shisō 現代思想, special issue 臨時増刊号, Bukkyō wo kangaeru 佛教を考える (Oct 2018): 73-86. — 80-81 |
The Tiwei Boli sūtra was one of the first attempts made in China to intimately mix Indian ideas with ostensibly Chinese ideas. Since Sengyou 僧祐, this sūtra has always been known as an apocryphal text, but nevertheless, important Chinese masters such as Zhiyi 智顗 or Jizang 吉藏, etc. were happy to quote passages from it (without saying that it was a dubious source), or adapt its contents as pseudo-quotations. It is especially through these quotations, with the authority of their authors, that the sūtra had an important influence in the subsequent history. Particularly important among the texts so influenced are three apocryphal works of Tantric nature attributed to Śubhakarasiṃha, T. 905, 906 and 907 (on which see https://dazangthings.nz/cbc/text/1724/), which are generally considered to be late Tang fabrications. Later developments in Japanese medieval esoteric thought used these three apocryphal texts as source for the ideas related to the "Five Viscera maṇḍala" or Gozō mandara 五藏曼荼羅. Entry author: Nobumi Iyanaga |
|