Text: T0184; 修行本起經

Summary

Identifier T0184 [T]
Title 修行本起經 [T]
Date [None]
Unspecified Zhu Dali, 竺大力 [Sakaino 1935]
Translator 譯 Kang Mengxiang, 康孟詳; Zhu Dali, 竺大力 [T]
[orally] "translate/interpret" 傳語, 口宣[...言], 傳譯, 度語 Kang Mengxiang, 康孟詳 [Sakaino 1935]

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).

Assertions

Preferred? Source Pertains to Argument Details

No

[Palumbo 2003]  Palumbo, Antonello. “Dharmarakṣa and Kaṇṭhaka: White Horse Monasteries in Early Medieval China.” In Buddhist Asia: Papers from the First Conference of Buddhist Studies Held in Naples in May 2001, 168-216. Kyoto: Italian School of East Asian, Studies, 2003. — 202-203

Palumbo says that the ascription of the 修行本起經 T184 to Kang Mengxiang 康孟詳 is supported by neither the catalogue nor the biography section of CSZJJ. Rather, CSZJJ records that Dao'an commented that the text appeared "recently" in the South, and is merely an expansion of the "Lesser" Benqi jing [南方近出直益小本起耳, T2145:55.16c18]. On this basis, Palumbo takes issue with Zürcher’s confidence that the text is an authentic Han text (203 n. 107; referring to Zürcher [1991]: 296 n. 20).

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

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

Edit

No

[Zürcher 1991]  Zürcher, Erik. "A New Look at the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Texts." in Koichi Shinohara and Gregory Schopen, eds. From Benares to Beijing: Essays on Buddhism and Chinese Religion in Honour of Prof. Jan Yün-hua, 277-304. Oakville, Canada: Mosaic Press, 1991. — 296 n. 20

Zürcher argues that the “authenticity” of the Xiuxing benqi jing 修行本起經 T184 as a late Han translation is “beyond all doubt”, although it is not listed in Sengyou's Chu Sanzang ji ji. Zürcher's argument consists of three main steps: first, he states that the text forms a continuous whole with the Zhong benqi jing 中本起經 T196, such that the last paragraph of T184 is “repeated verbatim” in the beginning of T196; second, the text's early date is secured by the fact that several passages were incorporated in the 太子瑞應本起經 T185; finally, the text introduces a number of glosses with the words “Han yan...” 漢言 which Zürcher claims points to a date before 220. T184 one of a group of twenty-nine texts which Zürcher argues can be considered a “genuine” Han translation.

Entry author: Sophie Florence

Edit

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). — 333 n. 99

Zürcher writes that there is no mention of the Xiuxing benqi jing 修行本起經 T184 in Sengyou’s catalogue, either on his own authority of that of Dao’an. However, Zürcher considers this to be Sengyou’s mistake, given that all later catalogues refer to Dao’an’s bibliography for this sūtra. [Zürcher is mistaken: see :修行本起經二卷安公言南方近出直益小本起耳舊録有宿行本起疑即此經, T2145:55.16c18; JN/MR.]

Entry author: Sophie Florence

Edit

Yes

[Nattier 2008]  Nattier, Jan. A Guide to the Earliest Chinese Buddhist Translations: Texts from the Eastern Han 東漢 and Three Kingdoms 三國 Periods. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica X. Tokyo: The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University, 2008. — 104-109

Four texts are ascribed to Kang Mengxiang in the present Taishō. Sengyou only lists a title probably corresponding to 中本起經 T196. Zürcher, however, who usually follows Sengyou's reports of Dao'an's catalogue, in this case accepts the additional ascription to Kang Mengxiang of the 修行本起經 T184. This is because T184 and T196 together comprise a continuous narrative, with the last paragraph of T184 repeated verbatim at the beginning of T196. Further, the 太子瑞應本起經 T185, by Zhi Qian, contains a revised version of both T184 and T196, and Zürcher believes this means that Zhi Qian knew both as a single text. Zürcher is also swayed by the presence of glosses in T184 reading 漢言, and the fact that T184 is ascribed to Kang Mengxiang in the Gao seng zhuan. Nattier, however, argues that in their present form, the two texts have had different histories, even if a single text corresponding to both was originally produced by Kang Mengxiang.

Nattier reviews "extraordinarily complicated" testimony in the early catalogues on titles corresponding to that of T184 (105-106). Some of those catalogues ascribed the text to Kang Mengxiang, but not all.

Because T184 is sometimes ascribed to Kang Mengxiang in early catalogues, scholars have often assumed that T184 was used by Zhi Qian in preparing T185. However, Nattier summarises arguments by Kawano Satoshi, who has shown that T184 is often more expansive and elegant that T185. This violates the normal pattern usually seen when Zhi QIan is revising works by others: "that Zhi Qian adheres quite closely to both the content and much of the wording of the older version, while 'upgrading' some of its Buddhist terminology and recasting it in a more polished and elegant style". Further, T184 has passages in verse which in T185 are entirely in prose, but there is no known case in which Zhi Qian replaces verse with prose; "on the contrary, the use of a wide variety of metric forms is one of the hallmarks of Zhi Qian's style." Nattier summarises: "It is impossible to explain the content and style of [T185] as the result of a revision by Zhi Qian of [T184] as we know it today." Kawano proposes, on the basis of Daoan's remarks, that T184 is an E. Jin version of the earlier text reported by Dao'an under the title 小本起經, and that in composing T185, Zhi Qian drew on an older (now lost) version of the same Xiao benqi jing.

[Note: On p. 108, Nattier in fact writes, "Kawano proposes that the present [T184] *is a revision of* an Eastern Jin .... version of the Xiao benqi jing..." The words "is a revision of" might give the mistaken impression that Kawano argues for a revision process in two steps: (1) Xiao benqi jing > E. Jin version; (2) E. Jin version > (via "revision") T184. However, these words are a typo in Nattier, and Kawano simply argues that T184 is a revision made under the E. Jin of the earlier Xiao benqi jing. --- MR]

Nattier further examines internal evidence (formulae, ordinary verbs, Buddhist terms) which "confirm Kawano's contention that these two texts as we have them cannot be the product of the same hand. She concludes that although the two texts, as Zürcher noted, form a single narrative unit, "it now seems quite clear that these two texts are products of a different milieu." She accepts the ascription of T196 to Kang Mengxiang, but suggests that T184 "appears to be the product of a different time and place. If Kawano's reasoning is correct, it may be significantly younger, produced a century or more after his time."

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

No

[Kawano 1991]  Kawano Satoshi 河野訓. “Shoki Chūgoku Bukkyō no Butsuden o meguru shomondai: Shugyō hongi kyō ni kanren shite 初期中国佛教の仏伝をめぐる諸問題―『修行本起経』に関連して.” Tōyō bunka kenkyūjo kiyō 東洋文化研究所紀要 113 (1991): 127-176[L].

Summarised in Nattier (2008): 107-109. The 太子瑞應本起經 T185, solidly attributed to Zhi Qian, is known to correspond in overall content to the 修行本起經 T184 and 中本起經 T196, which (in that order) comprise a continuous narrative (though the relation between the two texts, Nattier argues, is somewhat uncertain). Because T184 is sometimes ascribed to Kang Mengxiang in early catalogues, scholars have often assumed that T184 was used by Zhi Qian in preparing T185. However, Kawano Satoshi has shown that T184 is often more expansive and elegant than T185. This violates the normal pattern usually seen when Zhi Qian is revising works by others: "that Zhi Qian adheres quite closely to both the content and much of the wording of the older version, while 'upgrading' some of its Buddhist terminology and recasting it in a more polished and elegant style". Further, T184 has passages in verse which in T185 are entirely in prose, but there is no known case in which Zhi Qian replaces verse with prose; "on the contrary, the use of a wide variety of metric forms is one of the hallmarks of Zhi Qian's style." Nattier summarises: "It is impossible to explain the content and style of [T185] as the result of a revision by Zhi Qian of [T184] as we know it today." Kawano proposes, on the basis of Daoan's remarks, that T184 is a revision of an E. Jin version of an earlier text (reported by Dao'an under the title 小本起經), and Zhi Qian drew on an older (now lost) version of the same text.

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

No

[Matsuda 1988]  Matsuda Yūko 松田裕子. “Chinese Versions of the Buddha’s Biography.” IBK 37, no. 1 (1988): 24-33.

Matsuda studies the interrelations between various version of the Buddha’s biography, especially in Chinese: the 修行本起經 T184 (ascribed in the Taishō to Zhu Dali 竺大力 and Kang Mengxiang 康孟詳, 太子瑞應本起經 T185 (ascribed in the Taishō to Zhi Qian), Pu yao jing 普曜經 T186 (ascribed in the Taishō to Dharmarakṣa), 方廣大莊嚴經 T187 (ascribed in the Taishō to*Divākara 地婆訶羅), 異出菩薩本起經 T188 (ascribed in the Taishō to Nie Daozhen聶道真), and the Sanskrit Lalitavistara. While it is a cornerstone of Matsuda’s own methodology to accept the canonical ascriptions for most of these texts (27), several of her observations could have important implications for consideration of ascription.

1) T186 and T187 incorporate similar material which is not found elsewhere. In T186:十八變品 Ch. 25, 佛至摩竭國品 Ch. 26, 化舍利弗目連品 Ch. 27, 優陀耶品 Ch. 28第二十五, i.e. T186 (III) 530c21-536c24. In T187, these portions are included in the “*Dharmacakrapravartana” chapter轉法輪品: T187 (III) 611b18-616a17 (the chapter itself begins at 605b9). Matsuda also states that T185 and T186 resemble one another more closely in these passages than elsewhere.

2) As Tokiwa Daijō had already observed, T186 contains some passages that are identical with passages in T184 and T185. Matsuda tabulates these correspondences between T185 and T186 (33).

Matsuda’s views on the interrelations between some of these texts are conveniently summarised in diagrammatic form (32), as follows (assuming traditional ascriptions of Chinese texts and attendant dating):

3) T185 has its sources in T184 and two hypothetical texts that Matsuda finds it necessary to posit to account for all the materials, “X” and “Y”.

4) T186 has its sources in T185, “Y”, and the older Indic Lalitavistara.

5) T188 has among its sources “X” (which means that T188 can be used to explain material in T185, for which sources otherwise cannot be found; and the combination of T185 and T188, in turn, warrants the posit of the onetime existence of “X”).

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

No

[Saitō 2013 ]  Saitō Takanobu 齊藤隆信. Kango butten ni okeru ge no kenkyū 漢語仏典における偈の研究. Kyoto: Hōzōkan, 2013. — 216-218

There is a view that the Xiuxing benqi jing 修行本起経 T184 was not translated in the Latter Han period, but in the E. Jin period, following the Taizi ruiying benqi jing 太子瑞應本起經 T185 ascribed to Zhi Qian (Kawano 1991). T184 contains eighteen stanzas of verses with four seven-character lines. Those verses are almost identical with those in T185.

Saitō mentions the view of Zürcher that, although the Xixiu benqi jing T184 and the Zhong benqi jing 中本起經 T196 are the most sophisticated Chinese translations of the Latter Han period, rhymed verse portions of the original text were translated into non-rhymed verses, with stanzas of five, seven, or nine characters. However, Saitō disagrees with Zürcher, pointing out that the verses in T184 do contain rhymes. He demonstrates by quoting the verses (with the rime 韻目 and the rime class 韻部 of the Jin period 晋代の韻部 at the end of each pair of lines) that, among the eighteen stanzas, eight have end rhymes, namely stanzas 2,4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12, and 18 (with some minor adjustments made based on the verses in T185) (216-218). Saitō also points out that stanza 3 and 15, and maybe stanza 1 and 14 should have loose end rhymes 通韻 according to the criteria given in the He yun pu 合韻譜 by Zhou Zumo 周祖謨.

Entry author: Michael Radich

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. — 240

Kang Mengxiang 康孟詳 played the role of the “interpreter/oral translator” 傳語/度語 for the Xiuxing benqi jing 修行本起經 T184. Sakaino quotes LDSBJ stating that Dao’an commended Kang Mengxiang’s translation of this text 亦是曇果與康孟詳。於迦維羅衛國齎梵本來。沙門竺大力。以建安二年三月。於雒陽譯。孟詳度為漢文。釋道安云。孟詳所翻弈弈流便足騰玄趣矣 (T2034 [XLIX], 54b14-17). However, Sakaino points out that Kang Mengxiang probably came to China before Tanguo 曇果, so the veracity of the above passage is suspect.

Entry author: Atsushi Iseki

Edit

No

[CSZJJ]  Sengyou 僧祐. Chu sanzang ji ji (CSZJJ) 出三藏記集 T2145.
[Dao'an catalogue]  Dao'an 道安. Zongli zhongjing mulu 綜理衆經目錄.
[Hayashiya 1945]  Hayashiya Tomojirō 林屋友次郎, Iyaku kyōrui no kenkyū‚ 異譯經類の研究, Tokyo: Tōyō bunko, 1945. — 458

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 Xiuxing ben qi jing 修行本起經 is included in the section of the Dao'an/CSZJJ list for texts listed as extant 有; the title bears an interlinear note: 安公言南方近出直益小本起耳舊錄有宿行本起疑即此經; 16c18. 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.). Hayashiya identifies this title with the Xiuxing ben qi jing 修行本起經 T184, attributed in the present canon (T) to Kang Mengxiang 康孟詳.

Entry author: Merijn ter Haar

Edit

No

[Nattier 2023b]  Nattier, Jan. "On Two Previously Unidentified Verses in Zhi Qian's Hybrid Dharmapada." ARIRIAB 26 (2023): 215-252. — 219 n. 20

Nattier notes that T184 features "unacknowledged citations" from T210: T184, T184 3.467a18–21, from T210 4.574a12–15; and T184 3.467a22–23 from T210 4.559b6–7.

Entry author: Michael Radich

Edit

No

[Fang and Lu 2023]  Fang Yixin 方一新 and Lu Lu 盧鹭. “Jin shiyu nian cong yuyan jiaodu kaobian keyi Fojing chengguo de huigu yu zhanwang” 近十余年從語言角度考辨可疑佛經成果的回顧與展望.” Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences Online Edition), Jan. 2023: 1–24. — 7

In a survey article of scholarship on questions of attribution in the Chinese canon published in the last decade, Fang and Lu state that Gu Manlin argues that the presence of the interlinear notes of the form “A (B in Chinese)” A 漢言 B in the Xiuxing benqi jing 修行本起經 T184 do not suffice to prove that T184 is a translation of the Han Dynasty. They refer to

Gu Manlin 顧滿林. “Donghan Fojing yuliao wenti juyu –– Cong Zhong benqi jing ‘Jinyan’ shuoqi ” 東漢佛經語料問題舉隅——從《中本起經》“晉言”說起. In Hanyu shi xuebao 漢語史學報, vol. 16, edited by Zhejiang daxue Hanyu shi yanjiu zhongxin 浙江大學漢語史研究中心, 240–250. Shanghai: Shanghai jiaoyu chubanshe, 2016.

Entry author: Mengji Huang

Edit

No

[Fang and Lu 2023]  Fang Yixin 方一新 and Lu Lu 盧鹭. “Jin shiyu nian cong yuyan jiaodu kaobian keyi Fojing chengguo de huigu yu zhanwang” 近十余年從語言角度考辨可疑佛經成果的回顧與展望.” Journal of Zhejiang University (Humanities and Social Sciences Online Edition), Jan. 2023: 1–24. — 7

In a survey article of scholarship on questions of attribution in the Chinese canon published in the last decade, Fang and Lu state that Li Zhouyuan argues that the Xiuxing benqi jing 修行本起經 T184 follows the Faju jing 法句經 T210. They refer to

Li Zhouyuan 李周淵. “Sanguo Zhi Qian yijing yanjiu” 三國支謙譯經研究. PhD diss., Fagu wenli xueyuan 法鼓文理學院 (2020): 216–220.

Entry author: Mengji Huang

Edit

No

[Gu 2016]  Gu Manlin 顧滿林. “Dong Han Fojing yuliao wenti juyu –– Cong Zhong benqi jing ‘Jin yan’ shuoqi” 東漢佛經語料問題舉隅——從《中本起經》“晉言”說起. In Hanyu shi xuebao 漢語史學報 16, edited by Zhejiang daxue hanyu shi yanjiu zhongxin 浙江大學漢語史研究中心, 240–250. Shanghai: Shanghai jiaoyu chubanshe, 2016.

The Xiuxing benqi jing 修行本起經 T184, ascribed to Zhu Dali 竺大力 and Kang Mengxiang 康孟詳, includes eight interlinear annotations reading, “A (B in Chinese)” A 漢言 B. Gu, following the widely accepted view that T184 is not a genuine Eastern Han translation, argues that the A 漢言 B annotations may not necessarily originate from the Han.

Gu further reinforces his argument by examining the same and similar annotations, such as A 漢云 B, A 漢曰 B, A 漢解 B, in Lokakṣema’s translations. He discovers that these interlinear notes only appear in three texts (T313, T624 and T626), which are considered unreliable Lokakṣema translations by Nattier (2008). In conclusion, he posits that such interlinear annotations provide sufficient evidence to prove that T184 is a translation from the Eastern Han Dynasty.

Entry author: Mengji Huang

Edit