著者

山野 千恵子 Chieko Yamano

出版者

国際仏教学大学院大学

雑誌

仙石山仏教学論集 = Sengokuyama Journal of Buddhist Studies (ISSN:13494341)

巻号頁・発行日

no.5, pp.86-65,

---

The Longshu pusa zhuan (龍樹菩薩伝, the Biography of Nāgārjuna, T. no. 2047) translated by Kumārajīva (350-409 or 344-413) is known as the oldest biography of the great Mādhyamika philosopher. Although the authenticity of Kumārajīvaʼs translation is now questioned, it is held to be translated or written in the period around Kumārajīvaʼs activity. However, Stuart H. Young recently proposed the hypothesis that the biography was fabricated based on the Fufazang yinyuan zhuan (付法蔵因縁伝, the Dharma-treasury transmission, T. no. 2058) dating the late 5th century. The Longshu pusa zhuan (龍樹菩薩伝) is almost same in content as a biography of Nāgārjuna appeared in the Fufazang yinyuan zhuan (付法蔵因縁伝) and we can find many parallel phrases between them. As to the anteroposterior relationship between the two texts, Henri Maspero mentioned that the Fufazang yinyuan zhuan (付法蔵因縁伝) was fabricated around the 6th century based on the earlier buddhist texts including the Longshu pusa zhuan (龍樹菩薩伝). His opinion has been widely accepted. In this paper, I will consider the anteroposterior relationship between the two texts by the following procedures. First, I will compare their sentences and contents. And second, from the point of view of the existent manuscripts and the printing editions of Song period which were newly found after the Taisho edition, I will reconstruct the history of editing of the Longshu pusa zhuan (龍樹菩薩伝). The considerations will lead to the conclusion that there was the third text that was the original of the existent Longshu pusa zhuan (龍樹菩薩伝), and that was one of sources of the Fufazang yinyuan zhuan (付法蔵因縁伝).

著者

林 敏 Min Lin

出版者

国際仏教学大学院大学

雑誌

仙石山論集 = Sengokuyama Journal of Buddhist Studies (ISSN:13494341)

巻号頁・発行日

no.1, pp.79-113, 2004-09-30

---

I. Brief Introductory StudyA. A survey of the original textThis information about original text is based on the photocopies (No.10-23) of "Dr. Tōru Haneda羽田亨 Depiction of the Collections of Xiyu Unearthed Historical Documents" stored at Haneda Museum. But as I had no access to the photos myself, I had to rely on Prof. Toshinori Ochiai's 落合俊典 own handnotes. The Foshuo zhaoming pusa jing first appears in the "Suspicious or Apocryphal Sutras" section of the Fa jing lu法經録 scroll 2 (594A.D). Later, it is mentioned in the Ren shou lu仁壽録 (602), Datang neidian lu大唐内典録 (664), Da zhou lu 大周録 (695), Kai yuan lu 開元録 (730), Zheng yuan lu 貞元録 (800), etc. In all these, it is considered as a suspicious or apocryphal sutras. Because of this reason, it did not appear in the official Canon for more than a thousand year until it was discovered in the Dunhuang. However, the text has not been published so far. In fact, it had something to do with the famous Dunhuang collector Li Shengduo李盛鐸 (1856-1937) who was then a high official during the Qing Dynasty. Li took advantage of his postion and privately stored and collected many works discovered at Dunhuang. This sutra was among those texts. According to Prof.Toshinori Ochiai's research, this text was bought by a Japanese businessman during World War II. It was then stored in an institution of a certain Japanese company, but it was not made accessible to the public. Fortunately, a well-known Japanese historical linguist Dr. Tōru Haneda (1882-1955), was allowed to research the text and recorded it in his description: "A Catalogue of Dunhuang Secret Works." Dr. Tōru Haneda's study was also included in his Catalogue. He also had the text block-printed. This edition is based on photocopies of Dr. Tōru Haneda's collection photocopies No.10-23, P932.During World War II, research had to stop, and the 17 cases of collection were transferred to Hyōgo-ken, Taki-gun, Ōyama-son兵庫縣多紀郡大山村. Later Dr. Tōru Haneda committed them to the care of Dr. Zenryū Tsukamoto 塚本善隆 (1898-1980), and Dr . Zenryū Tsukamoto to Dr. Tairyō Makita 牧田諦亮. In 1998, Dr. Tairyō Makita agreed to make pubic the Catalogue of Danhuang Secret Works. Prof. Ochiai has published a series of studies on this collection. This catalogue has two volumes. In volume I it records 736 works, and volume II lists 432 texts. This represents the same amount as Mr.Wang Chongming's Lishi jianchang dunhuang xueben mulu 李氏鑒藏敦煌寫本目録 of the "Dunhuang yishu sanlu敦煌遺書散録" of the "Dunhuang yishu zongmulu suoyin敦煌遺書總目録索引". From Dr. Haneda catalogue we can get a general idea about Li Shengduo's original text. No.84 of the catalogue says: "the Foshuo Zhaoming pusa jing written in the Six Dynasties." On the margin of page 2 of the photographs (No.10-23) of the Zhaoming pusa jing stored in Haneda Museum has a seal stating: "Dunhuang Stone Cave Secret Works" On the left bottom on page 10 there is a seal reading "Li Shengduo, my family and my relatives make offerings to the Buddha."B. Format of the Zhaoming Pusa jingThe above mentioned depiction which is stored at the Haneda Museum and called "Dr. Haneda's Depiction of the Collections of Historical Documents Unearthed in the Western Regions" contains photographs No.10-23 which end with the characters "the Foshuo Zhaoming Pusa jing ". The size and shape must be similar to the original text. This manuscript has only one scroll. Its cover folio is missing, and it is neatly written in regular-style caligraphy, with some traces of lishu style. One page contains 23 lines to 28 lines. The details are as follows: On the 1st page there are 2 lines (missing line to line 2); on the 2nd, 28 lines (line 3 to 30); on the 3rd, 28 lines (line 31 to 58); on the 4th, 23 lines (line 59 to 81); on the 5th, 23 lines (line 82 to 104); on the 6th, 23 lines (line 105 to 127); on the 7th, 23 lines (line 128 to 150); on the 8th, 3 lines (line 151 to 173); on the 9th, 23 lines (line 174 to 196); on the 10th, 11 lines (line 197 to 207). There are 158 lines with each 17 words,49 lines with 20 words, and 8 lines with 16 words, thus the 207 lines, have a total of 3,565 words.C. Previous Research on the SutraMr Eiichi Matsumoto松本榮一was the first scholar who studied the sutra. In his Dunhuang huade yanjiu敦煌畫的研究 chapter I, section II, there are several pictures, one of them being Ryōchyū's 良忠 "Guang jing xu wen zhuan tong ji觀經序文義傳通記" which cites part of the Zhaoming Pusa jing. Huiyuan, Zhiyi, Jicang, Shandao also list and make comparasions in their notes. They conclude that the pictures are from the Zhaoming Pusa jing. In his ground-breaking contribution at the International Conference commemorating the l00th anniversary of the discovery of Dunhuang caves, Prof. Ochiai discussed the Zhaoming pusa jing and Dr. Haneda's depiction "A Catalogue of Dunhuang Secret Works". He comes to the following conclusions: 1. The Zhaoming pusa jing is listed a "Suspicious or Apocryphal Sutras" in the traditional catalogues. 2. The Zhaoming pusa jing is an important historical document for the Chinese Pure Land Buddhism. 3. The sutra was compiled during a period of intensive debates on Buddhist philosophy, between the early 5th and the middle 6th century.D. The Contents of the Zhaoming Pusa jingThe opening part of the Zhaoming Pusa jing is missing. But we can see that its organization is different from the traditional three-part style: preface, purport and entrusting the circulation of the sutra. It consists of questions and replies between the the Zhaoming pusa and the Buddha. Ānanda 阿難と Śāriputra 舎利佛appear twice. Its doctrinal contents are very complicated, showing influences from such classical sutras as Pure Land, Nirvāṇa-, Prajñāpāramitā-, Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-, Avataṃsaka-, and Vimalakīrti-sūtra. Its main tenet is that the Buddha-nature already exists in everyone's mind. Everyone can reach the highest destination of great wisdom and enlightenment if one sincerely confesses one's sins to the Buddha, strictly obeys religious regulations, believes in retribution, chants the scriptures and the name of the Buddha, bathes in the Prajñā brightness, and enters the Buddha-nature. The purpose of the sutra is to help the common believer to find wisdom and enlightenment, and also to promote morality with the hope of finding happiness in this life and the next rebirths. It can be divided into the following sections: 1. From the beginning to line 19, they are questions and replies between the Zhaoming Pusa and Buhhda. The main teaching is that if a man does not practice love-kindness and obey religious regulations, he cannot maintain his human existence, will not become enlightened and cannot free himself. It will be impossible for him to get enlightened and to free himself, as the Zhaoming Pusa did. 2. Line 20 to line 56: mention all phenomena 萬法i.e., the five senses and consciousness, the six aspects六事 of the mindfulness of breathing, the eighteen characteristics peculiar to the Buddha, and the sixty-two perverted views, etc., arise on the basis of mind. If one sincerely confesses his sins to the Buddha, he will not fall into the hell. 3. Line 57 to line 67: the Zhaoming Pusa asks Buddha about chanting this sutra and praying to the Buddha .Buddha says it can prevent followers from falling into the Three Bad Destinies 三途, and help them to obtain Buddha's wisdom. 4. Line 68 to line 94: relate the story of Aṣatāśatru's killing his father. The sutra teaches us that sincere confession can help get rid of one's sin. It serves as an emphasis of the idea of retribution. 5. Line 95 to line 147: the sutra stresses that all living creatures have the Buddha-nature in their minds. If they listen to or chant this sutra, they will surely attain wisdom. 6. Line 148 to line 207: the Buddha explains why and how one can obtain the Dharma power and teaches the Zhaoming Pusa 250 discipline rules and three thousand monastic regulations 三千威儀.II. The text of the Zhaoming Pusa jing is contained in Li Shengduo's Collection (not summarised here): please refer to the Japanese version of this paper p.86-106.

著者

興津 香織 Kaori Okitsu

出版者

国際仏教学大学院大学

雑誌

仙石山論集 = Sengokuyama Journal of Buddhist Studies (ISSN:13494341)

巻号頁・発行日

no.4, pp.1-154, 2008-11-30

---

Ever since its transmission to Japan, the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya 倶舎論 has been keenly studied by scholar-monks of all Buddhist schools. This has given birth to a long and vast tradition of outstanding commentaries. As the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya refers to or implies knowledge concerning concepts peculiar to non-Buddhist philosophical schools of Ancient India, amongst which Sāṃkhya stands prominent, it is quite natural that the Japanese exegetes would also occasionally touch upon such ideas. Before the middle of the Edo period, however, no independent work dedicated to the presentation of the Sāṃkhya philosophy alone appears to have been produced. It seems that the first systematic treatment of this school is found in the Kusha ron kōki kōshū 倶舎論光記講輯 written by Dōkū 道空 (1686-1751). The text actually represents a 14-scroll 十四巻 sub-commentary to a Puguang's 普光 Jushe lun ji 倶舎論記. It covers only the first part of the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya dealing with the Chapter on Elements 界品, Chapter on Faculties 根品, Chapter on the Universe 世間品, and the Chapter on Karma 業品. Dōkū mentions Sāṃkhya in Scroll III (ad the Chapter on Faculties), in Scroll VII (ibid.), and in Scroll XIII (ad the Chapter on Karma). In Scrolls VII and XIII, Dōkū's treatment of the subject does not go beyond a typically exegetical approach: he briefly touches upon some Sāṃkhya concepts, and he does it mainly by relying on the explanations offered by such Chinese commentaries as the Jushe lun song shu 倶舎論頌疏 by Yuanhui 圓暉 and the Jushe lun song shu chao 倶舎論頌疏抄 by Huihui 慧暉. The discussion of Sāṃkhya in Scroll III stands, however, in sharp contrast to mere exegetical references. Here one can clearly see that Dōkū attempts a presentation of the whole philosophical system rather than of a few disparate notions. Actually, Dōkū extracted this part from his commentary on the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya and published it as an independent work entitled Notes Concerning the Twenty-five Principles of Sāṃkhya (數論二十五諦記 Suron nijūgo tai ki). Starting with the middle of the Edo period, i.e. 18th century, Japan actually witnesses the birth and development of an exegetical tradition on Paramārtha's 眞諦 translation of the *Suvarṇasaptati 金七十論, tradition which was to continue for nearly 200 years. Prior to this epoch no similar attempts are known to have existed. This may appear to us as a rather sudden and unexpected phenomenon, but seen in the context of its age, the movement had its causes. This period of peace, stability and growing prosperity allowed many brilliant scholar-monks to concentrate their efforts on deepening their understanding of all aspects of Buddhism, which also led to the necessity of conducting researching into non-Buddhist works. Nonetheless, the idea of studying and writing about heretical philosophical systems, historically hostile to Buddhism, must have aroused more or less resistance from the more traditional minds. What was the driving force and scholarly need of this new movement which presumably was strong enough to brush aside all opposition? In the present paper, I discuss the exposition of Sāṃkhya as found in Scroll III of the Kusha ron kōki kōshū and the Suron nijūgo tai ki by Dōkū, which may well represent the inception of this new movement. I hope that my examination of Dōkū's criticism of Xuanzang's 玄奘 understanding of Sāṃkhya will shed light upon the origins of the scholarly necessity which lay behind the new exegetical movement.

著者

橋本 文子

出版者

国際仏教学大学院大学

雑誌

仙石山佛教學論集 (ISSN:13494341)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.5, pp.1-25, 2010-04

---

Kūkai 空海(774-835) developed his theory on the ten stages of the thought of Awakening (Skt. bodhicitta; Ch. 菩提心) on the basis of the passage on the generation of the mental flow 心續生段found in the Mahāvairocanasūtra 大日經.1 It is organised into ten items which actually encapsulate Kūkaiʼs views on the hierarchical classification of the Buddhist teachings 教判and provides a fundamental piece in the doctrinal system of the Shingon school 眞言宗. Kūkai expounded this theory in the Himitsu mandara jūjūshin ron 秘密曼荼羅十住心論and the Hizō hōyaku 秘蔵寶鑰. The former, usually considered to be the earlier work, has survived in an unfinished form. There are quite a few details concerning its formation as well as content which remain unclear. Kūkaiʼ s theory of the ten stages of the thought of Awakening has presented generations of scholars and followers us with many doctrinal problems. Most notable is his allotment of the eighth stage (the so-called ichidō mui jūshin 一道無爲住心) to the Tiantai/Tendai school 天台宗 and the ninth one (goku mujishō jū shin 極無自性住心) to the Huayan/Kegon 華嚴tradition. This hierarchy which became an unmovable truth for the Shingon exponents was, quite understandably, unacceptable to the Tendai followers. The long-standing controversy has continued into modern timesand is still traceable in the studies of such representative scholars as Shishio Enshin 獅子王圓信2 and Nasu Seiryu 那須政隆.3 Nonetheless, one gets the impression that the polemical dispute between modern academics still retains an air of sectarian bias not unlike the works of many mediaeval and pre-modern scholastics. This, I believe, actually hampers any effort to tackle the problem in its essence. My view is that the controversy surrounding the allotment of the eighth and ninth stages brought significant changes to the understanding of the theory of the ten stages of the thought of Awakening in its entirety. A systematic view of the relevant opinions expressed by Tōmitsu (Shingon) exponents from the end of the Heian period throughout the first half of the Middle Ages as well as a good understanding of the background of the ideas put forward by earlier scholars is indispensible in any endevour to disentangle the intricacies surrounding this problem. This will, I hope, ultimately help us to elucidate the original meaning of Kūkaiʼs theory and its historical context. The present paper is part of this larger research project. It mainly deals with a critical text which may have influenced the Jū jū shanan shō 十住遮難抄, a work which I examined in some of my earlier studies.

著者

興津 香織 Kaori Okitsu

出版者

国際仏教学大学院大学

雑誌

仙石山論集 = Sengokuyama Journal of Buddhist Studies (ISSN:13494341)

巻号頁・発行日

no.2, pp.31-59, 2005-09-30

---

It is not unusual to see Buddhist texts mentioning and criticising other philosophical schools. Amongst these, Sāṁkhya and Vaiśeṣika have received particular attention. The fact that the *Suvarṇasaptatiśāstra (hereafter, Ss), translated by Paramārtha 眞諦, and the *Vaiśeṣikadaśapadārthaśāstra 勝宗十句義論, translated by Xuanzang 玄奘, are the only treatises of classical Indian systems rendered into Chinese and included in the Chinese Canon also testifies to the importance attached to these two schools. The way Buddhist thinkers regarded Sāṁkhya philosophy can be grasped from two angles. One is to survey their criticism against this system as reflected in Buddhist philosophical works. The other is to examine how the Ss was understood and assessed in commentaries written by Far Eastern Buddhist thinkers. The latter approach has not been attempted so far, and the present paper is part of a larger project to explore this less known aspect in the history of ideas. It seems that no exegetical work was written on the Ss in traditional China. By contrast, Japanese Buddhists showed considerable interest in this Sāṁkhya text. This can be seen as early as the Tenpyō Era (729-767), when the name of the Ss appears amongst the manuscripts copied by imperial order. We have no concrete data for the following centuries, but later, by the middle of the Tokugawa Period (18th century), the Ss became the object of an intense commentarial activity. Unfortunately, only very few of these works were printed and became available to the general public. Most of the rest has remained practically unknown to outside circles. As much as I could check, no less than 26 commentaries on the Ss (including texts no longer extant) were written during the Tokugawa Period. We know the names of 17 of these exegetes. For three of the commentaries, the authors’ names have been lost. An important figure, which I also briefly discuss, is Nyokai Nichimyō 如海日妙 (?-1711) who appears to have written or edited the ‘Postface to the *Suvarṇasaptatiśāstra’ 金七十論跋 attached to the woodblock print edition of the Ss issued in the Tokugawa Period. My paper also examines the texts and materials used by the scholar-monks associated with the Ss exegetical literature, the common corpus of knowledge shared by them as well as the distinctive characteristics of each of the available commentaries. I have paid special attention to the following three works which illustrate the philological methods of textual interpretation representative of this age: the Kon shichijū ron bikō 金七十論備考 by Gyō’ ō Gonzō 曉應嚴藏 (1724-1785), the Kon shichijū ron sho 金七十論疏 by Chidō Hōjū 智幢法住 (1723-1800), and the Kon shichijū ron sōkyō 金七十論藻鏡 by Rinjō Kaidō 林常快道 (1751-1810).