| Identifier | T397(8) [Ono and Maruyama 1933-1936] |
| Title | 虚空藏品; Gagaṇagañjaparipṛcchā [Ono and Maruyama 1933-1936] |
| 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 | Shengjian, 聖堅, Fajian, 法堅 [Ono and Maruyama 1933-1936] |
| Preferred? | Source | Pertains to | Argument | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
No |
[Ono and Maruyama 1933-1936] Ono Genmyō 小野玄妙, Maruyama Takao 丸山孝雄, eds. Bussho kaisetsu daijiten 佛書解說大辭典. Tokyo: Daitō shuppan, 1933-1936 [縮刷版 1999]. — s.v., Vol. 7, 477-483 (Hasuzawa Seijun 蓮澤成淳) |
The Xukong zang pin 虚空藏品 is missing in the 24-juan alternate version of the Saṃnipāta-sūtra 大集經 T397 recorded by Sengyou in CSZJJ 出三藏記集. It is included in all the other versions in the catalogues. The Xukong zang pin was also part of another older version Sengyou listed based on the "old catalogue" 舊錄, so Hasuzawa infers that the early version of the Xukong zang pin was indeed translated by *Dharmakṣema 曇無讖, together with the other parts of the Saṃnipāta-sūtra. However, it had been lost by the Liang 梁 period, and Sengyou was aware of that – he claims that the text titled Da xukong zang jing 大虚空藏經/Fangdeng wang xukong zang jing 方等王虚空藏經 is an alternate translation of the missing Xukong zang pin 虚空藏品 of the Saṃnipāta. Hasuzawa points out that this claim by Sengyou requires justification. Hasuzawa shows that there was a view mentioned in CSZJJ, which claimed that the Da xukong zang jing 大虚空藏經 was translated by Shengjian 聖堅, not *Dharmakṣema. He also points out that there are two more alternate versions recorded in CSZJJ, in addition to *Dharmakṣema's and Shengjian's. Hasuzawa maintains that it is natural to ascribe this Da xukong zang jing to Shengjian, for the following reasons: it is unlikely that *Dharmakṣema produced such a text, separate from the entirety of his 29-juan translation of the Saṃnipāta; Sengyou’s claim that the Da xukong zang jing is the same text as the Xukong jing pin of the Saṃnipāta is unreliable, because the version of the Saṃnipāta that he saw directly, in 24 juan, did not include the Xukong zang jing; and Fajing’s Zhongjing mulu and other catalogues following it show the existence of Shengjian's version of the Da xukong zang jing. However, Hasuzawa claims that if the Xukong zang pin was missing from the Saṃnipāta at the time of Sengyou, and then recorded as extant in the catalogues after CSZJJ, then that Xukong zang pin is likely to have been added later, and it might well have been Shengjian's version of the Da xukong zang jing. Hasuzawa compares the Xukong zang pin 虚空藏品 part of T397 with the other parts, and indeed identifies several notable differences. For example, while all the other parts often use the term 大集經, the Xukong zang pin does not, using instead other similar terms, such as 大普集經. Hasuzawa also point out the fact that the Xukong zang pin is entered in two different places in the text as a whole, depending upon the version. The Saṃnipāta is an anthology of largely independent texts, and so in principle, the order of the texts means little. However, in this case of the Xukong zang pin, since it was lost at the time of Sengyou and it is the only part that has been put in different places, this variation of location supports Hasuzawa’s view that the Xukong zang pin was added later, and is not *Dharmakṣema’s translation, but Shengjian’s. 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. — 587-588 |
Zhisheng saw a “modified Liang version” 梁本 of the *Mahāsaṃnipāta (the collection now extant as T397), which had the (alternate) *Sūryagarbha 日密分 T397(13), even though it was not included in the original Liang text. It is not known who translated this 日密分, and how it was added to the 大集經. It was not *Dharmakṣema’s work, Sakaino asserts, as in his translation lexicon, garbha should be 藏, not 密. The version that Zhisheng saw also had the *Gagaṇagañjaparipṛcchā 虛空藏品 (T397[8]) added to it later. This was also translated by a different person/persons from the other sutras/chapters (i.e. not by *Dharmakṣema), and has a different structure. 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. — 588-589 |
Zhisheng saw a “modified Liang version” 梁本 of the *Mahāsaṃnipāta (the collection now extant as T397), which included the (alternate) *Sūryagarbha 日密分 T397(13), and the *Gagaṇagañjaparipṛcchā 虛空藏品 (T397[10]), even though they were not included in the original Liang text. Sakaino agrees with Matsumoto Bunzaburō's 松本文三郎 view (in Butten hihyō ron 佛典批評論) that the Gagaṇagañjaparipṛcchā should be the Xukongzang pusa jing 虛空藏菩薩經 in eight juan ascribed to Shengjian 聖堅, which is recorded in CSZJJ. Little is known about this Shengjian, other than the record in CSZJJ. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
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. — 290-292 |
Ōno states that the ten-chapter version of the *Mahāsaṃnipāta 大方等大集經 T397 in twenty-four juan seen by Sengyou (eleven chapters, with the sixth missing) should have been the version translated by *Dharmakṣema (290). The Ākāśagarbha-sūtra 虛空藏品 and Akṣayamati-nirdeśa 無盡意品 were therefore added before the Liang 梁 period. The Ākāśagarbha-nirdeśa 虛空藏品 T379(8) is therefore actually the Fangdengwang Xu[kong]zang jing 方等王虛藏經 [sic, presumably方等王虛空藏經] in five juan ascribed to Shengjian 聖堅 of the W. Qin. This text was probably included in the Mahāsaṃipāta probably because it calls itself Dabao ji jing 大寶集經:此大寶[v.l. 普]集經 (T397 [XIII] 94b29). In different versions of the Mahāsaṃnipāta, this scripture is variously placed: in SYM, it substitutes for the missing sixth chapter in *Dharmakṣema; in the twelve-chapter version, it comes ninth, after Ch. 7 無言品 and Ch. 8 不可脱品; and in the Korean edition, it comes eighth, so that the usual Ch. 7 無言品 becomes Ch. 6, Ch. 8 becomes Ch. 7, and so on. Ōno points out that T397(8) differs in style from T397(1-7) and T397(8-11). It also starts with 如是我聞, as though it is an independent scripture. In addition, as Matsumoto Bunzaburō points out, its phraseology is not that of *Dharmakṣema (291). Ōno supposes that T397(8) was translated under Emperor Wu 武 of the (Liu) Song (420-422 CE). However, CSZJJ is not quite consistent in its reports about the title Fangdengwang Xukongzang jing 方等王虛空藏經, as it includes the title in the group of *Dharmakṣema’s translations, while at the same time giving a note stating that the Bie lu 別錄 ascribed it to Shengjian 聖堅 (方等王虛空藏經五卷(或云大虛空藏經檢經文與大集經第八虛空藏品同未詳是別出者不別錄云河南國乞佛時沙門釋聖堅譯出), T2145 [LV] 11b13-14). Ōno asserts that there is no evidence that *Dharmakṣema translated a version of this text (291-292). Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[Bielu CSZJJ] Bielu 別錄 as reported by CSZJJ 出三藏記集. — T2145 (LV) 11b13-14 |
In an interlinear note, CSZJJ reports that in a/the Bie lu, the 方等王虛空藏經 (probably to be identified with T397(8)) was ascribed to Shengjian 聖堅: 方等王虛空藏經 ... 別錄云河南國乞佛時沙門釋聖堅譯出. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|