| Identifier | T0536 [T] |
| Title | 申日兒本經 [T] |
| Date | W. Jin 西晋 [Hayashiya 1945] |
| Unspecified | Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 [Hayashiya 1945] |
| Translator 譯 | Guṇabhadra 求那跋陀羅 [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 |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. — T2145 (LV) 27a25 |
In Sengyou's Chu sanzang ji ji, T536 is regarded as an anonymous translation, that is to say, it is listed in the "Newly Compiled Continuation of the Assorted List of Anonymous Translations" 新集續撰失譯雜經錄 (juan 4): 申日兜本經一卷. NOTE: A note in the T apparatus to the title of T536 reads: 申日兒[v.l. 兜SP]本經, 兒或作兜或無本字）【元】，（申日是長者之名兒即長者之子也）【明】 Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
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. — Note to title in apparatus. |
申日兒[v.l. 兜SP]本經, 兒或作兜或無本字）【元】，（申日是長者之名兒即長者之子也）【明】 Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Hayashiya 1945] Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎, Iyaku kyōrui no kenkyū‚ 異譯經類の研究, Tokyo: Tōyō bunko, 1945. — 410-435 |
According to Hayashiya, there exist only three alternate translations of the Shenri jing 申日經: Yueguang tongzi jing/Yueming tongzi jing 月光童子經/月明童子經 ascribed to Dharmarakṣa; The first two of these are listed by Dao’an, and the third first appears in the recompilation of the catalogue of assorted anonymous scriptures 失譯雜經錄of CSZJJ (with a mistaken title Shenri dou benjing 申日兜本經 given by Sengyou). Although there is one more text in the group, Shiliyue jing 失利越經, an anonymous scripture of the W. Jin period or earlier, Hayashiya points out that this text was already lost at the time of Sengyou and has not been found since. Hayashiya maintains that any other ascriptions or texts appear in the catalogues are incorrect or redundant and should be excised (for example, LDSBJ ascribes the Shenri jing to Zhi Qian, and a Shendou ben jing 申兜本經 = Shenri er ben jing 申日兒本經 to Guṇabhadra 求那跋陀羅, but Hayashiya rejects both of these ascriptions as groundless.) In the Taishō, there exist the following three texts: Yueguang tongzi jing 月光童子經 T534 ascribed to Dharmarakṣa Hayashiya compares the style and vocabulary of these texts with the Sheng jing 生經 T154, a text that he regards as an established Dharmarakṣa translation, in order to see which one of the three is really Dharmarakṣa’s work. Based on this comparison, Hayashiya asserts that T534 is indeed the work of Dharmarakṣa, because T534 and T154 share quite a few words and phrases, including 聞如是, 世尊, 與大比丘衆, 慈悲喜護, and 無常苦空非身 (Hayashiya lists detailed differences between 生經, T534, T535, and T536 in length at 430-432). Hayashiya admits that there is a problem in identifying Dharmarakṣa’s work, which is that his vocabulary can vary according to the year of production and amanuenses, and that T534, as well as T535 and T536, contain a number of words and phrases that never appear in any other Mahāyāna texts ascribed to Dharmarakṣa. Nonetheless, Hayashiya argues that T534 is Dharmarakṣa’s work, because the positive match of the vocabulary is good enough, and the text has been consistently ascribed to Dharmarakṣa since Jingtai (422-423). According to Hayashiya, it is also slightly odd that the name Yueming 月明 does not appear in T534, since the original title of the text was Yueming tongzi jing 月明童子經, as listed in Dao’an’s catalogue. However, it does not affect the ascription of the text because there is no other candidate for the Yueguang tongzi jing/Yueming tongzi jing. Hayashiya asserts that T535 and T536 are also translations of the W. Jin period or earlier, based on the textual comparison. Further, he claims that T535 is most likely to have originally been entitled Shenri er ben jing, while T536 should have been called Shenri jing 申日經, since the former focuses on Shenri’s 申日 son 兒, and the latter on Shenri himself. Hayashiya thinks that the ascriptions that the Taishō gives to T535 and T536 are incorrect. The ascription of T535 to Dharmarakṣa is to be rejected since there is only one work of Dharmarakṣa in the group recorded in the foregoing catalogues, namely T534. The ascription of T536 to Guṇabhadra comes from LDSBJ, as mentioned above, and is groundless. Thus, according to Hayashiya, the correct titles and ascriptions of T534, T535, and T536 are as follows: T534: Dharmarakṣa; Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[Fajing 594] Fajing 法經. Zhongjing mulu 眾經目錄 T2146. — T2146 (LV) 119a21 |
Ascribed to Guṇabhadra in an interlinear note in Fajing: 宋沙門求那跋陀羅譯. This note is carried only in SYM, i.e. it is missing from K. [Note: This title is treated as anonymous in CSZJJ. This ought to mean that Fajing is the first to give the ascription to Guṇabhadra --- MR.] Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Fei 597] Fei Changfang 費長房. Lidai sanbao ji (LDSBJ) 歷代三寶紀 T2034. — T2034 (XLIX) 91c10, 102c15-16, 62c20, 58b17 |
T536 is ascribed to Guṇabhadra in LDSBJ, with no particular source, under the title 申兜本經, with a note reading 或申日. An interlinear note in LDSBJ says that the 德護長者經二卷 ascribed to Narendrayaśas is largely identical in substance to this text; another says the same of a text ascribed to Dharmarakṣa (cf. T534, T535). A 申日經 is also ascribed to Zhi Qian in LDSBJ. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
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]. — vol. 6, pp. 163-164 |
Satō Ryōchi 佐藤良智 points out that the 申日兒本經 T536 ascribed to Guṇabhadra 求那跋陀羅, the 月光童子經 T534 ascribed to Dharmarakṣa and the 申日經 T535 ascribed to Dharmarakṣa share the same contents, and that T536 should be the oldest of the three, since it has the simplest story and wording. Satō also claims that some parts of T535 suggest that the text is an apocryphon that was created by re-writing 改作 T536. He adds that 兒 in the title 申日兒本經 is written 兜 in CSZJJ and some other catalogues, and that those three scriptures are a clear example of the development of a group of scriptures over time. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
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]. — Volume 6, p.163-164 |
Satō Ryōchi 佐藤良智 points out that the Shenri'er ben jing 申日兒本經 T536 ascribed to Guṇabhadra 求那跋陀羅, the Yueguang tongzi jing 月光童子經 T534 ascribed to Dharmarakṣa and the Shenri jing 申日經 T535 ascribed to Dharmarakṣa share the same contents [all are regarded loosely as alternate versions of the Candraprabhakumāra-sūtra], and that T536 should be the oldest of the three since it has the simplest story and wording. Satō also claims that some parts of T535 suggest that the text is apocryphal, created by re-writing 改作 T536. 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. — 633-638 |
|
Sakaino argues that dozens of new ascriptions to Guṇabhadra 求那跋陀羅 added in LDSBJ are incorrect. He shows that the ascriptions for these extant texts are part of a broader pattern whereby Fei Changfang, in LDSBJ, takes titles in groups from lists of anonymous scriptures in Sengyou's CSZJJ, and assigns an entire group holus-bolus to a single or several translators. This procedure leads to a sudden ballooning of a given translator's corpus (if not its creation ex nihilo), and other absurd consequences, like the appearance that a certain translator specialised in texts on a particular topic (because Sengyou grouped titles in his lists by topic). Guṇabhadra is one of the purported "translators" to whom Fei applies this procedure. This entry lists extant texts ascribed to Guṇabhadra to which Sakaino's criticism here applies. According to Sakaino, Fei lists 78 titles as Guṇabhadra’s work (including the 13 already ascribed to Guṇabhadra in CSZJJ). Among them, as many as 48 titles were actually taken from Sengyou’s “newly compiled catalogue of anonymous scriptures” 新集失譯錄. (Sakaino claims that 13 titles ascribed to Guṇabhadra in CSZJJ are the only reliable record of Guṇabhadra’s work.) To illustrate the problem, Sakaino lists the groups of titles from Sengyou’s “newly compiled catalogue of anonymous scriptures” that were newly ascribed to Guṇabhadra by Fei without any solid grounds (635-637). Thus, Sakaino demonstrates that Fei took titles from the certain groups in Sengyou’s “newly compiled catalogue of anonymous scriptures” and allocated them to Guṇabhadra (Sakaino implies clearly that the ascriptions of them to Guṇabhadra are baseless). Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
No |
[Shi Zhanghui 2004] Shi Zhanghui 釋章慧. “Shenyue jing jingben dingwei yu jingti kao 《申曰經》經本定位與經題考.” Chung-Hwa Buddhist Studies 中華佛學研究 8 (2004): 51-100. |
In this paper, Ven. Zhanghui argues against an assertion made by Hayashiya Tomojirō in Iyaku kyōrui no kenkyū 異譯經類の研究 (1945). Hayashiya claims that the titles of the Shenri jing 申日經 T535 and the Shenri'er ben jing 申日兒本經 T536 have been swapped. Zhanghui argues that Hayashiya misunderstands the records in KYSJL, leading him to argue incorrectly. Additionally, Zhanghui points out that the two titles should be corrected respectively to Shenyue jing 申曰經 and Shenyuedou benjing 申曰兜本經. Zhanghui claims that 申曰/申曰兜 are transcriptions of the proper name Śrīgup/Śrīgupta or Sirigut/Sirigutta in Indic languages, and that the substitutions of 日 and 兒 for 曰 and 兜 are likely later errors (63, 74-75). [Zhanghui does not make reference to pronunciations reconstructed by historical phonologists in making this argument --- MR.] Zhanghui bases her analysis on evidence from multiple Buddhist catalogues, Āgama texts and prefaces, quotations from Jing lü yi xiang 經律異相 T2121, and various editions of KYSJL found in different versions of the canon. In arguing against Hayashiya, Zhanghui points out that the text of the Shenridou ben jing 申日兜本經 cited by Jing lü yi xiang 經律異相 T2121 is no different from that of T536. Zhanghui further surmises that the text of the Shenridou ben jing witnessed by Zhisheng 智昇 should be the same as that seen by Sengyou 僧祐, given that the author of Jing lü yi xiang is Baochang 寶唱, a disciple of Sengyou. Additionally, Zhanghui argues that the correct title for T536 should be Shenridou ben jing or Shenridou jing 申日兜經, rather than Shenri’er ben jing, which is an error that dates back at least as far as Sengyou (74-75). Zhanghui's arguments about the title also aim to refute the old arguments by Hayashiya that the titles of T535 and T536 had been switched. On the assumption that the title including er 兒 "son" was correct, Hayashiya's idea was that idea that a text bearing that title should revolve around the son as the central character, and the content of T535 precisely accords with that title, focusing on the son. On the basis of her argument that the name transcribed in the title should in fact be Shenyuedou 申曰兜, Zhanghui holds that there are no longer grounds to reverse the titles of T535 and T536. Entry author: Chengpeng Li |
|