 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
《寶如來經》和《菩薩十住經》譯者略考=A Short Note on the Translator of the Bao Ju Lai Ching and the Pu Sa Shih Chu Ching |
|
|
|
| 作者 |
釋繼彥
|
|---|
| 出處題名 |
法光學壇=Dharma Light Lyceum
|
|---|
| 卷期 | n.1 |
|---|
| 出版日期 | 1997 |
|---|
| 頁次 | 61 - 72 |
|---|
| 出版者 | 法光佛教文化研究所=Fa-kuang Institute of Buddhist Studies |
|---|
| 出版者網址 |
http://fakuang.org.tw/index1.htm
|
|---|
| 出版地 | 臺北市, 臺灣 [Taipei shih, Taiwan] |
|---|
| 資料類型 | 期刊論文=Journal Article |
|---|
| 使用語言 | 中文=Chinese |
|---|
| 關鍵詞 | 譯經=The Translation of Sutra; 經錄=經典目錄=Catalogue of Sutras; 菩薩=Bodhisattva; 三摩地=三昧=Samadhi; 偽經=Spurious Scripture; 考證; 三寶=The Three Jewels |
|---|
| 摘要 | 本文要探討祇多蜜是否確實曾翻譯《寶如來[三昧]經》和《菩薩十住經》。透過檢視十部經錄 -- 從現存最古的《出三藏記集》到作為刻藏依據的《開元釋教錄》中此經譯者的記載，從經錄記錄的異同和變化來發掘問題產生的端倪，並考證，推論其可能事實。《出三藏記錄》僅記載《寶如來[三昧]經》為「南海胡作」的疑偽經典，祇多蜜翻譯《無極寶[三昧]經》始見於《歷代三寶記》，至《大周刊定眾經目錄》將「南海胡作」的《寶如來[三昧]經》當作祇多蜜翻譯《無極寶[三味]經》，這中間出現一些可疑點，加上經文的種種現象，不免令人懷疑此經作為祇多蜜譯經的真實性。《菩薩十住經》的情況則較複雜，問題包括了譯者和經名的混亂，本文也就經錄記載及其經文略加探討與分析。
The present paper tries to determine whether Giitamitra was the actual translator of both the Baoru lai (san mei) ching and the P'u sa shih chu ching. Ten canon catalogues ranging from the oldest extant work (Ch'u san tsang chi chi) to the
catalogue that became the model for the later blockprint canons (K'ai yuan shih chiao lu) were consulted. A survey and analysis of the relevant material enables us to spot where information begins to become doubtful, and to infere what the facts might have been.
The Ch'u san tsang chi chi only states that a Bao ru lai (san mei) ching was a doubtful scripture of Southern provenance, and the Li tai san pao chi records Giitamitra as the translator of a Wu chi pao (san mei) ching. It was then the Ta Chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu which claimed that the Bao ru lai (san mei) ching of Southern provenance was translated by Giitamitra · This is doubtful, especially when we look at the style of the translation.
The situation with the P'u sa shih chu ching is even more complicated since both the translator's name and the text title have been subjected to confusion. The present paper offers a brief discussion and analysis refering to catalogue documentation as well as the text itself. |
|---|
| 點閱次數 | 1402 |
|---|
| 建檔日期 | 1998.04.28
|
|---|
| 更新日期 | 2017.08.23 |
|---|
 |
建議您使用 Chrome, Firefox, Safari(Mac) 瀏覽器能獲得較好的檢索效果，IE不支援本檢索系統。
|
