Text: T1433; 羯磨

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.

• T1433; 羯磨

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

• Title: 羯磨
• People: Tandi, 曇諦, 曇帝, *Dharmasatya? (translator 譯)
• Identifier: T1433

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. — 166

• T1433; 羯磨

Funayama very briefly reports that Hirakawa concluded that the Jiemo 羯磨 T1433 ascribed to Tandi 曇諦 could not possibly be from the Wei, and is a digest of the Dharmagupta-vinaya 四分律 T1428, which was translated in the first half of the fifth century. He cites Hirakawa (1960).

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

• Date: 5th century

No

[Hureau 2009]  Hureau, Sylvie. "Translations, Apocrypha, and the Emergence of the Buddhist Canon." In Early Chinese Religion, Part Two: The Period of Division (220-589 AC), edited by John Lagerwey and Lü Pengzhi, 741-774. Handbook of Oriental Studies. Section 4: China. Leiden: Brill, 2009. — 745

• T1432; 曇無德律部雜羯磨
• T1433; 羯磨

Hureau says that Hirakawa has argued that "in their present form, these texts [T1432, T1433] seem to be extracts from the translation of the complete Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, which appeared at the beginning of the 5th century." She refers to Hirakawa (1960): 203.

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

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. — 92

• T1433; 羯磨

Sakaino states that LDSBJ is the source of the ascriptions given to Tandi 曇諦 (*Dharmasatya?), An Faxian 安法賢 , and An Faqin 安法欽 , which appear in various catalogues. [Sakaino makes this remark in a context where he is fiercely criticising the general pattern of assignment of such new ascriptions in LDSBJ, and this therefore suggests that he regards all these ascriptions as baseless simply because they were first given by LDSBJ ---AI] . The 曇無徳羯磨 [羯磨 T1433] is still extant, and is first ascribed to Tandi by Fei [implying that the ascription is baseless].

Entry author: Atsushi Iseki

Edit

• People: Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 (unspecified)

No

[Kamata 1982]  Kamata Shigeo 鎌田茂雄. Chūgoku bukkyō shi, dai ikkan: Shodenki no bukkyō 中国仏教史 第一巻 初伝期末の仏教. Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai, 1982. — 184-185

• T1432; 曇無德律部雜羯磨
• T1433; 羯磨

Tandi 曇諦 is reported in GSZ (with the name Tandi 曇帝), LDSBJ, and KYL. The Tanwude jiemo 曇無德羯磨 T1433 is ascribed to him (as still in T) in GSZ (and also in LDSBJ and KYL), with the place of translation the Baima si 白馬寺 in Luoyang 洛陽. Kamata points out that it is questionable if this Baimao si actually existed. LDSBJ claims that the ascription to Tandi is based on a record in Zhu Daozu’s supposed catalogue of Wei and Wu translations 竺道祖魏錄, but Zhu Daozu’s catalogue itself should not be taken as a genuine and reliable source. As for the Si fen lü jiemo 四分律羯磨 (*Dharmaguptaka-karma) ascribed to Tandi, Kamata summarises Hirakawa’s view that this text was produced after the translation of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya 四分律 T1428, as in the case of the Karma 羯磨 (i.e. a text of nearly the same title, ; cf. 四分雜羯磨 T1432) ascribed to Kang Sengkai. Both the Si fen lü jiemo and the Karma were therefore not translation texts, but were compiled in China.

Entry author: Atsushi Iseki

Edit

• People: Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 (compiler 編集)

No

[Fang and Lu 2023]  Fang Yixin 方一新 and Lu Lu 盧鹭. “Jin shiyu nian cong yuyan jiaodu kaobian keyi Fojing chengguo de huigu yu zhanwang” 近十余年從語言角度考辨可疑佛經成果的回顧與展望.” Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences Online Edition), Jan. 2023: 1–24. — 10

• T1433; 羯磨

In an article surveying scholarship on questions of attribution in the Chinese canon published in the last decade, Fang and Lu state that Yan and Lu argue that the vocabulary in the Jiemo 羯磨 T1433 is close to that in the translations of the later Western Jin period. They also argue that it was not translated by Tandi 曇諦 in the Cao Wei period, but may have been assembled by Shi Tandi 釋曇諦 in the Liu Song period. They refer to

Yan Qiamao 顏洽茂 and Lu Qiaoqin 盧巧琴. “Shiyi wuti zhi jing niandai de kaozheng–yi wuti Cao Wei Tandi yi Tanwude jiemo wei li” 失譯、誤題之經年代的考證——以誤題曹魏曇諦譯《曇無德羯磨》為例. Zhejiang daxue xuebao (renwen shehui kexue ban) 浙江大學學報（人文社會科學版） 5 (2009): 178–185.

Entry author: Mengji Huang

Edit

No

[Fang and Lu 2023]  Fang Yixin 方一新 and Lu Lu 盧鹭. “Jin shiyu nian cong yuyan jiaodu kaobian keyi Fojing chengguo de huigu yu zhanwang” 近十余年從語言角度考辨可疑佛經成果的回顧與展望.” Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences Online Edition), Jan. 2023: 1–24. — 10

• T1433; 羯磨

In an article surveying scholarship on questions of attribution in the Chinese canon published in the last decade, Fang and Lu state that Lu argues that the vocabulary of the Jiemo 羯磨 T1433 is close to that in the translations of the later Western Jin period. She also argues that it was not translated by Tandi 曇諦 in the Cao Wei period, but may have been assembled by Shi Tandi 釋曇諦 in the Liu Song period. They refer to

Lu Qiaoqin 盧巧琴. Dong Han Wei Jin Nanbeichao yijing yuliao de jianbie 東漢魏晉南北朝譯經語料的鑒別. Hangzhou: Zhejian daxue, 2011: 101–116.

Entry author: Mengji Huang

Edit

No

[Fang and Lu 2023]  Fang Yixin 方一新 and Lu Lu 盧鹭. “Jin shiyu nian cong yuyan jiaodu kaobian keyi Fojing chengguo de huigu yu zhanwang” 近十余年從語言角度考辨可疑佛經成果的回顧與展望.” Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences Online Edition), Jan. 2023: 1–24. — 10

• T1433; 羯磨

In an article surveying scholarship on questions of attribution in the Chinese canon published in the last decade, Fang and Lu state that Yan et al. argue that the vocabulary of the Jiemo 羯磨 T1433 is close to that in the translations of the later Western Jin period. They also argue that it was not translated by Tandi 曇諦 in the Cao Wei period, but may have been assembled by Shi Tandi 釋曇諦 in the Liu Song period. They refer to

Yan Qiamao 顏洽茂 et al. Fanyi Fojing yuliao yanjiu 翻譯佛經語料研究. Hangzhou: Zhejiang daxue, 2019: 444–459.

Entry author: Mengji Huang

Edit