Text: T1527; 涅槃論

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.

• T1527; 涅槃論

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

• Title: 涅槃論
• People: Dharmabodhi, 達磨菩提 (translator 譯)
• Identifier: T1527

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]. — v.8, 410-412

• T1527; 涅槃論

Fuse Kōgaku 布施浩岳 argues that it is likely that this Niepan lun 涅槃論 is apocryphal, but there is no decisive evidence for that. His strong reason is the content of the text. He thinks that the substance of the text is panjiao 教判思想. Especially, there is a claim that the root text, the *Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra 大涅槃經, teaches both Sudden Teaching 頓教 and the Gradual Teaching (漸教). If this text was really written by Vasbandhu, then it would be a significant problem in the history of the classification of Buddhist thought, since then it must have been the case that the classification into Sudden Teaching 頓教 and Gradual Teaching 漸教 already existed in India. Fuse has not seen any texts produced in India that mention the Niepan lun 涅槃論. However, he also states that nobody would be able to claim that the Niepan lun 涅槃論 could not possibly be cited anywhere in Indian texts, and therefore must certainly be a Chinese composition. Thus, Fuse thinks that the Niepan lun 涅槃論 is likely to be apocryphal, even without decisive evidence. Fuse also discusses evidence adduced by Sakaino that the Niepan lun 涅槃論 is apocryphal, but rejects them as too weak.

Entry author: Atsushi Iseki

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. — 619-620

• T1527; 涅槃論

Sakaino argues that the Niepan lun 涅槃論 T1527 is an apocryphon 僞經, even though it is presented in the canon (to this day) as a translation of a commentary by Vasubandhu 婆藪槃豆. Sakaino’s main reason for this claim is that the text is structured according to the “Southern Version” 南本 T375, but the Nanben is a modified version of the “Northern Version” 北本 by *Dharmakṣema, with a revised structure based upon the six-juan version of the text ascribed to Faxian 法顯, 大般泥洹經 T376. It is transparently impossible that the structure of such a text could have been known to Vasubandhu in India. According to Sakaino, this text was probably produced prior to the N. Wei 北魏.

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

[Sakaino 1935]  Sakaino Kōyō 境野黄洋. Shina Bukkyō seishi 支那佛教精史. Tokyo: Sakaino Kōyō Hakushi Ikō Kankōkai, 1935. — 621-622

• T1527; 涅槃論
• T1528; 涅槃經本有今無偈論; San shi fenbie lun 三世分別論; Ben you jin wu lun 本有今無論

Acording to Sakaino, LDSBJ (and KYL following it) lists a Ben you jin wu lun 本有今無論 (cf. 涅槃經本有今無偈論 T1528) in one juan, a Da banniepan jing lun 大般涅槃經論 in one juan, and a San shi fenbie lun 三世分別論 in one juan, all of which are ascribed to Paramārtha 眞諦 . Sakaino claims that these three are actually the same text, which is listed under several titles by mistake. This text was probably an excerpt from the Niepan lun 涅槃論 T1527, which Sakaino argues is probably an apocryphon [see separate CBC@ record on T1527]. He believes that T1527 and T1528 were probably originally a single text (or parts thereof), which got separated in transmission and subsequently circulated independently. The text is a commentary, in part, on a famous verse in MPNMS reading 本有今無/本無今有/三世有法/無有是處, which bears on the topic of the "three times" 三世 (past, present, future), so that all three of these alternate titles fit the content.

Entry author: Atsushi Iseki

Edit