| Identifier | T0435 [T] |
| Title | 佛說滅十方冥經 [T] |
| Date | September 29, 304 [Boucher 1996] |
| Translator 譯 | Dharmarakṣa 竺法護, 曇摩羅察 [T] |
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 |
[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 |
[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 |
[Boucher 2006] Boucher, Daniel. “Dharmarakṣa and the Transmission of Buddhism to China.” In China at the Crossroads: A Festschrift in Honor of Victor H. Mair. Special issue of Asia Major, 3rd Ser., 19, no. 1-2 (2006): 13-37. — 25-26, 28-29 |
|
The 23 texts appearing on this list are all given dates in CZSJJ between the years 303 and 305. Boucher does not give his sources for individual dates in this list, saying only "I will coordinate the list of his translation corpus provided by Sengyou...with the preserved colophons that provide information on the dates and locations at which some texts were translated." [However, all dates appear in a list of Dharmarakṣa’s works at CSZJJ T2145:55.7b12-9c24. There, with the sole exception of that for T435, the Taishō apparatus indicates that these dates are found only in alternate witnesses, usually the Song, Yuan and Ming together, but not in the Korean---MR.] Boucher says of texts on this list (28-29): "From 303 to 305 there appears to be a rash of rapidly completed short texts. However, there are several reasons why we might be suspicious of these records. First, it was precisely during this period that northern China was in a desperate state of political and social turmoil. The Xiongnu and Xianbei had forced the emperor to flee the capital in 304, ravaging Luoyang before turning westward to attach Chang'an in 306. Although this by no means proves that Dharmarakṣa could not have found safe haven in which to continue his translation work, conditions would certainly have been far from ideal. Second, some of our records of these translations are in doubt. For example, the Shelifu huiguo jing that is currently extant is attributed to An Shigao but almost certainly postdates both him and Dharmarakṣa [no reference given]. If this is the same text referred to by Sengyou, it is a mistaken attribution. Also, the dates of all the texts translated in 304 except Yanjingding jing are uncertain; they refer either to dates that are not known to exist from our calendrical sources (e.g. the third year of the Tai'an 太安 period) or to dates that are ambiguous." Boucher's list, with his Sanskrit equivalents for the titles where he proposes on, and Chu sanzang ji ji (T2145) loci [not provided by Boucher], is as follows: 樓炭經 Lokasthāna-sūtra [listed as lost in CSZJJ 8c20] [The CSZJJ note applying to all these texts reads: Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
No |
[Chen 2005] Chen, Jinhua. "Some Aspects of the Buddhist Translation Procedure in Early Medieval China: With Special References to a Longstanding Misreading of a Keyword in the Earliest Extant Buddhist Catalogue in East Asia." Journal Asiatique 293.2 (2005): 603-662. — 657-661 |
|
Chen lists thirty-three texts discussed in Sengyou's Chu sanzang ji ji for which dates are given, but where those dates cannot be corroborated by any "translation documents" [meaning primary sources discussing circumstances etc. of translation, such as colophons]: Fangdeng nihuan jing 方等般泥洹經 T378; Entry author: Sophie Florence |
|
|
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 |
[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. — 62 |
Mei notes that the following texts in the Dharmarakṣa corpus are "unique exemplars": 須真天子經 T588, 魔逆經 T589, 弘道廣顯三昧經 T635, 寶網經 T433, 滅十方冥經 435, 文殊悔過經 T459, 琉璃王經 T513, 心明經 T569. 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. — 279 |
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 Mie shifang ming jing 滅十方冥經 Daśadigandhakāravidvamsana-sūtra T435,which Sengyou dated September 29, 304. 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 |
[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 |
[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 |
|