Text: T1530; 佛地經論

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.

• T1530; 佛地經論

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

• Title: 佛地經論
• People: Xuanzang, 玄奘 (translator 譯)
• Identifier: T1530

No

[Katsumata 1958]  Katsumata, Shunkyō勝又俊教. “Butsuji kyōron to Jō yuishiki ron: Jō yuishiki ron no genkei o kōkyū suru isshiten shite 佛地經論と成唯識論-成唯識論の原型を考究する一視點して." Journal of Indian and Buddhist Studies (Indogaku Bukkyōgaku kenkyū印度學佛教學研究) 7, no. 1 (1958): 13–22. — 13

• T1530; 佛地經論

According to KYL, the “translation” of the Fo di jing lun 佛地經論 (*Buddhabhūmy-upadeśa?) T1530 by Xuanzang began on 3.10 Zhenguan貞觀 23, and was completed on 24.11 Zhenguan 24 (Nov. 12 649-Jan. 2 650) (T2154 [XXVI] 556b5) at Daci'ensi大慈恩寺. Through an investigation of parallel passages found in T1530, the Cheng weishi lun 成唯識論 T1585, and Śīlabhadra’s commentary on the *Buddhabhūmi preserved in Tibetan translation, the Sangs rgyas kyi sa'i rnam par bshad pa (*Āryabuddhabhūmi-vyākhyāna, D 3997), Katsumata concludes that T1530 represents a significantly more detailed understanding of the “original Sanskrit text of Bandhuprabhā, et al.” than that evinced by parallel passages in the Tibetan, and that numerous passages have been interpolated into the text by Xuanzang himself. Katsumata also finds that the doctrinal teachings on the four parts of cognition 四分說 developed in this text are close to the “position of Dharmapāla” as adumbrated in the Cheng weishi lun. Scholars like Lusthaus (2008) and Sakuma (1989) have taken the existence of parallels between this work and Cheng weishi lun as evidence that both works reflect the views of Xuanzang, rather than “Dharmapāla.” On such views, both texts would count as something like a “Chinese composition”, or a text “between composition and translation.” In contrast to such arguments, Katsumata takes the doctrinal similarities between the positions developed in work and the Cheng weishi lun as evidence to strengthen the attribution of the Cheng weishi lun to Dharmapāla. Katsumata bases this argument upon the following grounds: he regards the traditional attribution found in Chinese commentarial works as strong; he believes that the structure and content of the Fo di jing lun served as a “prototype” (Jpn. genkei原型) for the later compilation of the Cheng weishi lun in 659; and he supposes that Banduprabhā was a disciple of Dharmapāla at Nālanda University, and thus Dharmapāla must have “directly influenced” Banduprabhā in the latter’s composition of the *Buddhabhūmi, the Indic “original” from which the Fo di jing lun was “translated.” [Katsumata’s argument for these dates for Bandhuprabhā’s floruit appears circular, in that it relies upon later commentaries and defends the attribution of Fo di jing lun to Bandhuprabhā by observing the incorporation of Fo di jing lun materials into the Cheng weishi lun --- BB].

Sakuma Hidenori 佐久間秀範. “Genjō ni okeru shiki no atsukai-kata玄奘における識の扱い方” (Some Aspects of Hsuan-Tsang's Treatment of Vijñana and Jñāna [in Japanese]). Tōhōgaku 東方學 78 (1989): 55–67.

Lusthaus, Dan. “A Pre-Dharmakīrti Indian Discussion of Dignāga Preserved in Chinese Translation: The Buddhabhūmy-upadeśa.” Journal of the Centre for Buddhist Studies, Sri Lanka 6 (2008): 1-65.

Entry author: Billy Brewster

Edit

No

[Lusthaus 2008]  Lusthaus, Dan. “A Pre-Dharmakīrti Indian Discussion of Dignāga Preserved in Chinese Translation: The Buddhabhūmy-upadeśa.” Journal of the Centre for Buddhist Studies, Sri Lanka 6 (2008): 1-65.

• T1530; 佛地經論

Lusthaus argues that in addition to Bandhuprabhā, part of the Fo di jing lun 佛地經論 (*Buddhabhūmy-upadeśa?) should be attributed to Dignāga, based upon the appearance in this work of parts of a commentary on a famous śloka from the Pramāṇa-samuccaya 集量論 enumerating either three 三分說 or four parts of perception 四分說. This famous stanza only appears in Cheng weishi lun (T1585 [XXXI] 10b15), although commentary on it survives in both the Cheng weishi lun (T1585 [XXXI] 10b17-28) and the Fo di jing lun (T1530 [XXVI] 303a26-b28).

Entry author: Billy Brewster

Edit

No

[Funayama 2001]  Funayama Tōru. “Two Notes on Dharmapāla and Dharmakīrti.” Zinbun 35 (2001): 1-11. — 6 n. 31

• T1530; 佛地經論

Funayama observes that the term 證自證分appears for the first time in the Fo di jing lun 佛地經論 (T1530 [XXVI] 303b14). This important epistemological term, which denotes the self-awareness of the mind’s self-awareness, the crucial fourth part of perception in Xuanzang’s four-part model 四分說, is not otherwise found in the body of Indic works rendered into Chinese by Xuanzang. It is, however, found in the Cheng weishi lun (T1585 [XXXI] 10b18) and represents a paradigmatic tenet of Sinitic Yogācāra Buddhist doctrinal teachings on the nature of perception. In light of this internal evidence, Funayama questions the degree to which the Fo di jing lun should be considered a “translation” from an Indic original, as opposed to an agenda-driven composition put together by Xuanzang and his disciples to further key Sinitic Yogācāra Buddhist tenets.

Entry author: Billy Brewster

Edit