| Identifier | T0034 [T] |
| Title | 法海經 [T] |
| Date | 西晋 [Hayashiya 1941] |
| Unspecified | Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 [Hayashiya 1945] |
| Translator 譯 | Faju 法炬 [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 |
[Hayashiya 1941] Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎. Kyōroku kenkyū 経録研究. Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1941. — 944-947 |
A Fa hai jing 法海經 is listed in Sengyou's recompilation of Dao'an's catalogue of anonymous scriptures 新集安公失譯. It was one of eleven entries that was added when Sengyou recompiled the catalogue. It was lost in Sengyou’s time. Nonetheless, Hayashiya claims that it is safe to regard the Fa hai jing 法海經 T34 as the same text listed in Sengyou's recompilation of Dao'an's catalogue. This text is an alternate translation of the Hai ba de jing 海八徳經. There are twelve texts with similar content in this group, T34. Hayashiya refers to Chapter 2 of Hayashiya 1945 for detailed discussion on this group of texts. LDSBJ 三寶記 and some other catalogues that followed it classify T34 as Faju's 法炬 translation. Hayashiya compares this text with surviving translations by Faju, viz., the Zhude futian jing 諸徳福田經 T683 and the Faju piyu jing 法句譬喩經 T211, and claims that the vocabulary and tone of T34 is quite different from that of those two texts, but that the latter two texts are clearly composed by the same person. Thus, the attribution of the T34 to Faju must be wrong. Hayuashiya concludes that the text should be classifies as an anonymous scripture of the W. Jin 西晋 period, since it is listed in Sengyou's recompilation of Dao'an's catalogue. Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
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). — 70, 345 n. 254 |
|
"Dao’an only speaks about four works translated in the period 290-360 by Faju 法炬, a monk of unknown origin, and about two others translated by Faju together with the śramaṇa Fali 法立.... Later bibliographies have made Faju...the target of...wild attributions: no less than 132 works figure under his name in the late sixth century [LDSBJ], which number is reduced to 40 in the somewhat more critical [KYL]" (70). [MR: In fact, the passage in CSZJJ referred to in Zürcher's note (345 n. 254) shows that Zürcher has made an error here; the two texts supposedly translated with Faju were *among* the four translated by Fali (右四部。凡十二卷。晉惠懷時。沙門法炬譯出。其法句喻福田二經。炬與沙門法立共譯出; T2145:55.9c19-10a3), reducing the total number of ascriptions supported by this evidence even further. The four texts listed are: 樓炭經 (prob. = *Lokasthāna[?] 大樓炭經 T23) The main significance of Zürcher's remark is negative---the remaining ascriptions to Faju and Fali in the modern (Taishō) canon should be regarded as weaker and more open to suspicion. This record lists all such texts: T33, T34, T39, T49, T55, T64, T65, T70, T111, T113, T119, T122, T133, T178, T215, T332, T500, T501, T502, T503, T508, T509, T695, T739. However, we should also note that Zürcher adds:] "Sengyou states that Fali made a great number of translations which were lost during the troubles of the yongjia era (307-313) before they had been copied and put into circulation, a remark which is repeated by Huijiao in his Gaoseng zhuan....It may...have happened that some works were rediscovered at a rather later date, but Sengyou's silence about Faju remains puzzling. Dao'an's catalouge, our invaluable guide for the early period, gives out around 300 AD; although Dao'an compiled it at Xiangyang in 374 and probably added new entries until his death in 385, he did not include any works translated after the end of the Western Jin." 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. — 65-82 |
According to Hayashiya, among the titles he refers to as the group of Hai ba de jing 海八徳經 texts, only five ever existed, four of which are included in the Taishō. Those four titles are: the Heng shui jing 恒水經 T33, attributed to Faju 法炬 (The fifth one in the group, the Hai you ba de jing 海有八事經 listed by Dao’an, has been lost since the 梁 period.) Hayashiya argues that all of the attributions given to the four extant texts are incorrect, and that the texts should be reclassified as anonymous scriptures. The gist of Hayashiya’s analysis of T34, attributed to Faju, can be shown as follows: According to Hayashiya, the tone and vocabulary of T34 are clearly that of the W. Jin period. The ascription to Faju was first given by LDSBJ, without any grounds, and hence should be rejected. Hayashiya further asserts that T34 is the Fa hai jing 法海經 shown in Dao’an’s catalogue, because among the group of Hai ba de jing 海八徳經 texts, only T34 contains phrases that could be the source of the title Fa hai jing 法海經 (72). Thus, he concludes that the text should be reclassified as an anonymous scripture of the Wei-Wu 魏呉 or the W. Jin period (80-81). Entry author: Atsushi Iseki |
|
|
|
No |
[CSZJJ] Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145. |
Hayashiya examines Dao’an’s list of anonymous scriptures, as “recompiled” by Sengyou under the title 新集安公失譯經錄 at CSZJJ T2145 (LV) 16c7-18c2. The Fahai jing 法海經 is included in the section of the Dao'an/CSZJJ list for texts listed as “missing” 闕; 18b18. Hayashiya gives, in tabulated form, information about the treatment of the same texts in Fajing T2146, LDSBJ T2034, the KYL T2154, and his own opinion about whether or not the text is extant in T, and if so, where (by vol. and page no.). The above text is identified by Hayashiya with the Fahai jing 法海經 T34, attributed in the present canon (T) to Faju 法炬. Entry author: Merijn ter Haar |
|