Text: Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經

Summary

Identifier	[None]
Title	Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經 [Hayashiya 1941]
Date	[None]

Assertions

Preferred?	Source	Pertains to	Argument	Details
No	[Hayashiya 1941] Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎. Kyōroku kenkyū 経録研究. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1941. — 422-423	Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經	LDSBJ (Fei Changfang) says that the Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經 was translated by Dharmakṣema 曇無識, but Hayashiya points out that Dao'an already classified a Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經 as a dubious scripture 疑經, and KYL 開元録 also included it in the same category. [MR: Note that the mention by Dao'an would make it a chronological impossibility that the text was translated by Dharmakṣema. This text is known in the Nanatsudera manuscript, and was published in Chūgoku senjutsu kyōten(sono 1), edited by Makita Tairyō [Tokyo: Daitō Shuppansha, 1994], pp. 6–67."] Entry author: Atsushi Iseki Edit	Title: Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經
No	[Ochiai 1994] Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典. “Shoki yakkyō to Bira zammai kyō 初期訳経と毘羅三昧経.” In Nanatsu-dera koitsu kyōten kenkyū sōsho, daiikkan. Chūgoku senjutsu kyōten (sono ichi) 七寺古迭経典研究叢書　第一巻　中国撰述経典（その一）, edited by Ochiai Toshinori, 323-374. Tokyo: Daitō shuppan, 1994.	Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經	Ochiai compares the Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經 to a number of other early texts, in considerable detail, primarily in an effort to determine the likely date of its composition. The text is listed among 26 sūtras Dao'an regarded as probably of Chinese composition. Among those texts, it seems to be unique in being extant today (it was discovered by Ochiai among the Nanatsudera 七寺 manuscripts), with the exception of some fragments of a handful of the other texts which survive in quotation 佚文. For these reasons, the study of the text could reveal a lot about the beginnings of the practice of composing sūtras in China. On the basis of comparison to the translation terminology of a range of translators from the Han, through the Wu and Three Kingdoms, through to Dharmarakṣa, Ochiai concludes tentatively that it is unlikely the text was composed as late as Dharmarakṣa, because among the terminology he was able to date, it contains a greater preponderance of terms proper to earlier periods. Ochiai also remarks on the likely meaning of the word piluo 毘羅 in the title of the text. He discusses several possibilities, but following Hirakawa, he favours an interpretation that sees the word as a probably transcription of an Indic word like peḍa or piṭaka, and would link the word to a passage in *Lokakṣema’s Kāśyapaparivarta 遺日摩尼寶經 T350, which gives a fourfold list (or typology) of texts as follows: 何謂四事。但求索好經法。六波羅蜜。及菩薩毘羅經。及佛諸品, T350 (XII) 189c2-3. However, where Hirakawa saw 菩薩毘羅經 in this list as probably giving the title of a single text, Ochiai favours the hypothesis that it refers to a class of texts. Ochiai thus suggests that the Piluo sanmei jing may have been composed in China in order to fill the perceived gap in Chinese knowledge of Indic texts, based upon the mistaken understanding (as with Hirakawa) that the item in the T350 list was the title of a single text. NOTE: Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典. “Bira zammai kyō to shoki yakkyō毘羅三昧経と初期訳経.” IKB 42, no. 2 (1994): 33-38 is largely the same as parts of the longer study summarised here. Entry author: Michael Radich Edit
No	[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. [Dao'an catalogue] Dao'an 道安. Zongli zhongjing mulu 綜理衆經目錄. — 新集安公疑經錄 T2145 (LV) 38b8-c16.	Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經	As reported by Sengyou in the portion of CSZJJ entitled 新集安公疑經錄, the Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經 is listed as one of twenty-six "dubious" 疑 sūtras by Dao'an in his Zongli zhongjing mulu 綜理衆經目錄. A citation from the text is preserved at Fa yuan zhu lin 法苑珠林 T2122 (LIII) 611c25-612a5., as discussed by Ochiai (1994). The entirety of the first volume of Makita et al. (1994-2000) is dedicated to this text. Entry author: Michael Radich Edit

Preferred?

Source

Pertains to

Argument

Details

[Hayashiya 1941] Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎. Kyōroku kenkyū 経録研究. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1941. — 422-423

Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經

LDSBJ (Fei Changfang) says that the Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經 was translated by *Dharmakṣema 曇無識, but Hayashiya points out that Dao'an already classified a Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經 as a dubious scripture 疑經, and KYL 開元録 also included it in the same category. [MR: Note that the mention by Dao'an would make it a chronological impossibility that the text was translated by *Dharmakṣema. This text is known in the Nanatsudera manuscript, and was published in Chūgoku senjutsu kyōten(sono 1), edited by Makita Tairyō [Tokyo: Daitō Shuppansha, 1994], pp. 6–67."]

Entry author: Atsushi Iseki

Edit

Title: Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經

[Ochiai 1994] Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典. “Shoki yakkyō to Bira zammai kyō 初期訳経と毘羅三昧経.” In Nanatsu-dera koitsu kyōten kenkyū sōsho, daiikkan. Chūgoku senjutsu kyōten (sono ichi) 七寺古迭経典研究叢書　第一巻　中国撰述経典（その一）, edited by Ochiai Toshinori, 323-374. Tokyo: Daitō shuppan, 1994.

Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經

Ochiai compares the Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經 to a number of other early texts, in considerable detail, primarily in an effort to determine the likely date of its composition. The text is listed among 26 sūtras Dao'an regarded as probably of Chinese composition. Among those texts, it seems to be unique in being extant today (it was discovered by Ochiai among the Nanatsudera 七寺 manuscripts), with the exception of some fragments of a handful of the other texts which survive in quotation 佚文. For these reasons, the study of the text could reveal a lot about the beginnings of the practice of composing sūtras in China. On the basis of comparison to the translation terminology of a range of translators from the Han, through the Wu and Three Kingdoms, through to Dharmarakṣa, Ochiai concludes tentatively that it is unlikely the text was composed as late as Dharmarakṣa, because among the terminology he was able to date, it contains a greater preponderance of terms proper to earlier periods.

Ochiai also remarks on the likely meaning of the word piluo 毘羅 in the title of the text. He discusses several possibilities, but following Hirakawa, he favours an interpretation that sees the word as a probably transcription of an Indic word like peḍa or piṭaka, and would link the word to a passage in *Lokakṣema’s Kāśyapaparivarta 遺日摩尼寶經 T350, which gives a fourfold list (or typology) of texts as follows: 何謂四事。但求索好經法。六波羅蜜。及菩薩毘羅經。及佛諸品, T350 (XII) 189c2-3. However, where Hirakawa saw 菩薩毘羅經 in this list as probably giving the title of a single text, Ochiai favours the hypothesis that it refers to a class of texts. Ochiai thus suggests that the Piluo sanmei jing may have been composed in China in order to fill the perceived gap in Chinese knowledge of Indic texts, based upon the mistaken understanding (as with Hirakawa) that the item in the T350 list was the title of a single text.

NOTE: Ochiai Toshinori 落合俊典. “Bira zammai kyō to shoki yakkyō毘羅三昧経と初期訳経.” IKB 42, no. 2 (1994): 33-38 is largely the same as parts of the longer study summarised here.

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145.
[Dao'an catalogue] Dao'an 道安. Zongli zhongjing mulu 綜理衆經目錄. — 新集安公疑經錄 T2145 (LV) 38b8-c16.

Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經

As reported by Sengyou in the portion of CSZJJ entitled 新集安公疑經錄, the Piluo sanmei jing 毘羅三昧經 is listed as one of twenty-six "dubious" 疑 sūtras by Dao'an in his Zongli zhongjing mulu 綜理衆經目錄. A citation from the text is preserved at Fa yuan zhu lin 法苑珠林 T2122 (LIII) 611c25-612a5., as discussed by Ochiai (1994). The entirety of the first volume of Makita et al. (1994-2000) is dedicated to this text.

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit