|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
《法集要誦經》(T213)的翻譯議題=Translation Issues of the Faji Yaosong Jing(T213) |
|
|
|
| Author |
蘇錦坤 (著)=Su, Ken (au.)
|
|---|
| Source |
正觀雜誌=Satyabhisamaya: A Buddhist Studies Quarterly
|
|---|
| Volume | n.79 |
|---|
| Date | 2016.12.25 |
|---|
| Pages | 99 - 171 |
|---|
| Publisher | 正觀雜誌社 |
|---|
| Publisher Url |
http://www.tt034.org.tw/
|
|---|
| Location | 南投縣, 臺灣 [Nantou hsien, Taiwan] |
|---|
| Content type | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| Language | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| Note | 作者為獨立研究者 |
|---|
| Keyword | 《法集要誦經》=Faji Yaosong Jing (T213); 《出曜經》=Chuyao Jing (T212); 《法句經》=Faju jing (T210); 沈丹森=Sen, Tansen |
|---|
| Abstract | 《大中祥符法寶錄》記載《法集要誦經》(T213)於雍熙二年(西元985年)翻譯，翻譯團隊包含天息災、法天、施護等人，譯事功成之後還上表回報。其後不久，宋太宗下詔「入藏」頒行，譯經團隊各有賞賜。雖然如此，此一翻譯仍然有「翻譯期間過短」、「經文字句脫落」與「不少偈頌的譯文承襲自《出曜經》(T212)」等值得探討的疑點。
本文接著依次探討《法集要誦經》(T213)翻譯議題，諸如「是否有範本依據」、「是否源頭文本(source text)即是《優陀那品》(Udanavarga, 梵文《法句經》)」與「沈丹森與水野弘元對此翻譯的評論」。
本文以「品文、品次與《優陀那品》相近」、「譯有《法句經》(T210)與《出曜經》(T212)所無的偈頌」、「重譯偈頌與《出曜經》(T212)不盡相同」、「譯詞修正舊譯」與「獨有的音譯詞」等五個理由，主張《法集要誦經》(T213)的翻譯有印度語系文本(Indic Text)為依據，不是揉雜各個譯本所能編輯而成；因此《大中祥符法寶錄》記載的「上五部並中天竺梵本所出」應可採信。
其次列舉譯例說明，《法集要誦經》(T213)比《法句經》(T210)和《出曜經》(T212)更接近《優陀那品》，但是，也不是等同於今本《優陀那品》。
下一個議題則轉述沈丹森與水野弘元對《法集要誦經》(T213)的評論，並且論列其有失公允。
筆者在校勘四部漢譯《法句經》的過程中，體認到《法句經》、《法句譬喻經》、《出曜經》、《法集要誦經》的校勘、標點與訓詁，其實互有關連，因此必須建立漢譯《法句經》的偈頌對照表，以收校勘、詮釋之功。
The official record Dazhong Xiang Fabao Lu (大中祥符法寶錄) described the Faji Yaosong Jing (法集要誦經, T213) was translated in the second year of Yongxi (C. E. 985, 雍熙二年). Members of this translation team are Tianxizai (天息災), Fatisn (法天), Shihu (施護), etc. Formal report of the accomplishment of this task had been submitted to the Emperor Song Tianzong (宋太宗). Soon after this event, this translation received orders from him to be collected as part of the first printed tripitaka, Kaibao zang (開寶藏). Members of this translation team were all either promoted or rewarded. Be as it may, there are some issues of the Faji Yaosong Jing(T213), such as 'the translation period was questionable short', 'its script showed missing stanzas of some verses' and 'some verses copied directly from Chuyao Jing (出曜經, T212)'.
This article then explores issues of this translation, such as 'was it translated with an Indic text', 'was its source text equivalent to the Udanavarga' and 'the criticism against this translation by Tansen Sen and Mizuno Kogen respectively'.
Here I enumerate five reasons why it is translated with an Indic text: 'the titles and sequence of it are close enough to that of the Udanavarga', 'its corrects the previous translation' and 'its unique phonetic vocabulary'. So, the sentence of the Dazhong Xiangfu Fabao Lu (大中祥符法寶錄), 'All five sutras abovementioned are translated out of Sanskrit texts of Middle-India', sounds reliable.
Then I raised some examples demonstrating that the Faji Yaosong Jing (法集要誦經, T213) is quite close to the Udavarga, but not completely equivalent to it.
The next topic is about the criticism against this translation by Tansen Sen and Mizuno Kogen respectively. I would like to say that it is not a fair comment against this translation.
During the collating process among these four Chinese 'Dharmapadas', it comes to me that it would not be efficient and sufficient to simply collate only one of them. The collations, expoundings and applying modern punctuation to any one of them do call helps from the other three translations. And, it takes the comparative catalogues among them to simplify this task. |
|---|
| Table of contents | 1.前言 102
2.《法集要誦經》的翻譯有其「梵本」依據 111
2.1 品名與品次 111
2.2 獨有的偈頌 114
2.3 《出曜經》的重譯偈頌 120
2.4 改正舊譯 125
2.5 音譯詞 129
3.《法集要誦經》與《優陀那品》的異同 136
3.1 兩者的相似處 137
3.2 兩者的差異 139
4.沈丹森與水野弘元的評論 145
5.校勘與標點 152
6.結語 160
7.謝詞 162
參考書目 163
|
|---|
| ISSN | 16099575 (P) |
|---|
| Hits | 1157 |
|---|
| Created date | 2017.01.18 |
|---|
| Modified date | 2017.09.07 |
|---|
 |
Best viewed with Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) but not supported IE
|
|
|
