Saṃyukta Āgama: Preliminary Findings and Translation of Fascicle 1 of the Bieyi Za Ahan Jing 別譯雜阿含經 (T.100)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Buddhist Studies Review 23(1) 2006, 21–60 ISSN (print): 0256-2897 ISSN (online): 1747-9681 The Shorter Chinese Saṃyukta Āgama: Preliminary Findings and Translation of Fascicle 1 of the Bieyi za ahan jing 別譯雜阿含經 (T.100) MARCUS BINGENHEIMER Chung-hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies, Taiwan [email protected] ABSTRACT: This study provides an overview of what is known about the shorter Chi- nese Saṃyukta Āgama and also an annotated translation of its fi rst 22 suttas, which corresponds to the Pali Bhikkhu Saṃyutta. Recent research suggests that T.100 belongs to the corpus of Sarvāstivāda Literature. The annotations resolve some unique expressions, correct some mistakes found in the textus receptus, and point out signifi - cant diff erences between the versions of the suttas. The text base for Chinese is the CBETA/Taishō edition, for Pāli the Chaṭṭa Saṅgāyana edition published by the Vipas- sana Research Institute, if not indicated otherwise (but with volume and page refer- ences to the Pali Text Society editions). The paper is a fi rst result of the Bieyi za ahan jing-Project1 at the Chung-hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies, Taiwan, which aims at a digital edition and translation of the complete work. There are three translations of Saṃyukta Āgamas in Chinese. By far the largest is the Za ahan jing 雜阿含經 (T.99) (ZA) in 50 fascicles. It was translated between 435 and 443 by Guṇabhadra (394–468) working in Chang’an. The ZA contains 1362 sut- tas, according to the division in the Taishō edition.2 Next to that we have the Bieyi za ahan jing 別譯雜阿含經 (T.100) (BZA) in 16 fascicles, the fi rst fascicle of which is translated below. The BZA, by an unknown translator (-team), is convincingly dated 385–4313 and contains 364 short suttas. Finally, there is an even earlier par- tial translation of a Saṃyukta Āgama in one fascicle, again called Za ahan jing 雜 1. The project is funded by the Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation 蔣經國基金會. The support of the foundation is gratefully acknowledged. I also thank Shi Zhanghui and Jung Hsi-chin for their unfailing and patient support of the project. Shi Zhanghui especially has off ered numerous suggestions for this translation. 2. The (confused) order in which the ZA suttas are presented in the printed canon editions has been restored by Shi Yinshun (1983), based on discoveries by Lü Cheng (1923). Another impor- tant contribution is Enomoto (1994), who has identifi ed and edited available Sanskrit parallels for many ZA gāthās, some of which also have a parallel in the BZA. Other studies focus on the attribution and transmission of the ZA (Bando, 1982; Mizuno, 1988; Enomoto, 2001). 3. See Mizuno (1970: 486). © Equinox Publishing Ltd 2006, Unit 6, The Village, 101 Amies Street, London SW11 2JW 22 BUDDHIST STUDIES REVIEW 阿含經 (T.101), that contains 27 short suttas.4 As is the case with the other three Chinese Āgamas, there exist a number of independent translations of single sut- tas. In the Taishō edition these are assigned the nos. 102–24. ATTRIBUTION During the last hundred years, the BZA has been attributed to the Kāśyapiya,5 Dharmagupta or Mahīśāsaka,6 and Mūlasarvāstivāda7 schools. While the Kāśyapiya thesis has never actually been disproved – this is diffi cult since there are no sur- viving texts of this school to compare with – the evidence for the association of the BZA with the Kāśyapiyas is not very strong. To our mind, none of the tenents of the Kāśyapiyas as listed by Bareau (1955: 201) is proved by the three links cited by Akanuma. Regarding the Dharmagupta and Mahīśāsaka thesis, Enomoto has off ered evi- dence that the wording of the BZA gāthās does not match with the parallels found in the respective Vinayas of these schools.8 For the time being, an attribution of the BZA to the Mūlasarvāstivādins, mainly based on the wording of some gāthās and comparison of content with the respective Vinayas, seems to be the most plau- sible solution. Moreover, in light of the fact that there probably never was a real diff erence between the Mūlasarvāstivāda and Sarvāstivāda,9 it is for now best to regard the BZA and the ZA as two diff erent Saṃyukta collection from this school. Considering the geographic spread of the Sarvāstivādin/Mūlasarvāstivādins and their long infl uence on the history of Buddhist thought, diff erent lines of textual transmissions within this school are plausible, even probable. PARALLEL VERSIONS The most challenging aspect of editing and translating Āgama literature is that basically all texts exist in several versions. What we have are not individual texts but more or less complicated text-clusters consisting of parallel versions of the same text. I do not believe that it is necessary to assume an Ur-text for a cluster, but that diff erent versions of the same story or teaching existed from the very beginning of transmission.10 The web of text-clusters is extremely diffi cult both 4. See Harrison (2002). 5. Akanuma (1939: 49). Based on doctrinal points. Shi Yinshun follows Akanuma (Yinshun, 1971: 696). 6. Mizuno (1970) argues for these schools on formal, structural grounds. 7. Enomoto (1980, 1984a,b); Hiraoka (2000). 8. Enomoto (1980, 1984b). 9. Enomoto (2000). 10. This does not mean that eff orts to distinguish between diff erent layers in the texts are bound to fail. On the contrary, as K. Meisig (1987, 1988) has shown, the tools for text criticism developed © Equinox Publishing Ltd 2006 BINGENHEIMER THE SHORTER CHINESE SAṂYUKTA ĀGAMA 23 to disentangle and to represent. The most widely used comparative tables were published back in 1929.11 We are in the process of creating a new comparative catalog for the BZA. Based on Akanuma Chizen 赤沼智善 and Anesaki Masaharu’s 姉崎正治12 early catalogs, the tables included in the Foguang edition of the four major Ahan suttas, and, especially helpful, still unpublished material kindly pro- vided by Roderick Bucknell, we confi rm that all entries are indeed related and add our own fi ndings to produce a defi nitive comparative catalog for the 364 BZA suttas. Here is the result for the fi rst fascicle, entries marked with a ‘*’ are our own additions. Bieyi za ahan Za ahan Other Chinese Pāli Sanskrit/Tibetan (T.100) (T.99) BZA001 ZA1062 SN II 278-9 (Sujāto) Sujāta is praised 善生二種端嚴 BZA002 ZA1063 SN II 279 (Bhaddi) The Ugly Monk 憔悴的阿羅漢 BZA003 ZA1064 T.02.0125.0570b20 SN II 241 (Pakkanta) Enomoto, 1994, Devadatta and T.02.0125.0614a18 SN II 242 (Ratha) no.1064* Ajātasattu T.04.0203.0465b20* SN I 154 提婆達多貪利養 (Devadatta)(gāthā) AN II 73 (Devadatta) Vin II 187 (Cv.VII.2.5) BZA004 ZA1065 SN I 70 (Puriso)(gāthā) Waldschmidt, Monk ‘Elephant-head’ SN I 98 (Loko)(gāthā) 1968a: 23–6* 象首比丘墮地獄 BZA005 ZA1067* T.02.0125.0591a8* SN II 281 (Nando) Nanda 1 - Nanda is reproached 難陀著鮮淨衣 BZA006 ZA0275* AN IV 166-8 (Nando) Nanda 2 - Nanda is praised 難陀諸善功德 within biblical scholarship can be used with great success to stratify Buddhist suttas with the help of comparative analysis. 11. Akanuma (1929). Akanuma’s tables still work well, but, apart from a number of minor mis- takes, important material like the Sanskrit fragments published during the last 75 years is not included. We believe that these kind of work is better presented digitally. Roderick Bucknell, Venerable Analayo and Venerable Sujato are currently working on an online database, provi- sionally called ‘suttacentral’, that will provide updated and accessible tables. 12. Anesaki (1908). © Equinox Publishing Ltd 2006 24 BUDDHIST STUDIES REVIEW Bieyi za ahan Za ahan Other Chinese Pāli Sanskrit/Tibetan (T.100) (T.99) BZA007 ZA1068 SN II 281-2 Tissa is reproached (Tisso) 窒師恒懷瞋慢 BZA008 ZA1069 SN II 280 Enomoto, 1994, Visākha preaches well Visākho) no.1069* 毘舍佉善說法要 AN II 51 (Visākho) BZA009 ZA1070 SN II 277-8 A young monk does (Navo) his work 年少比丘壞魔軍 BZA010 ZA1071 SN II 282-4 Enomoto, 1994, Thera lives alone (Theranāmo) no.1071* 盡諸愛結名獨住 BZA011 ZA1072 Ud 5-6 Enomoto, 1994, Saṅgāmaji and his (Saṅgāmaji) no.1072* former wife 僧鉗不顧本二 BZA012 ZA1073 T.02.0116.0507b14 AN I 225-6 Waldschmidt, Ānanda and the three T.02.0117.0508a10 (Gandho) 1968a:16-23 kinds of scent T.02.0125.0613b10 Enomoto, 1994, 諸香不如戒香 no.1073* BZA013 ZA1074 T.01.0026.0497b4* Vin I 35 (Mv.I.22) Enomoto, 1994, Uruvela Kassapa T.01.0041.0825a23* no.1074* performs miracles T.03.0187.0612c6* 迦葉得遇大龍 T.03.0191.0962c16* T.04.0192.0032a14* T.14.0498.0766c25* T.22.1428.0797b3* BZA014 ZA1075 T.04.0203.0457a6* Vin II 74 (Cv.IV.4) Enomoto, 1994, Mettiya and Mettiyā T.22.1421.0015a3* Vin III 158 no.1075* slander Dabba T.22.1425.0280a19* (Amūlaka-saṅghādiseso)* 彌多求誣謗陀驃 T.22.1428.0587a25* T.23.1435.0022a8* T.24.1464.0867b9* BZA015 ZA1076 Ud 92-3 Enomoto, 1994, Dabba enters Nirvāṇa (Dabba-1)* no.1076* 陀驃欲入涅槃 Ud 93 (Dabba-2) © Equinox Publishing Ltd 2006 BINGENHEIMER THE SHORTER CHINESE SAṂYUKTA ĀGAMA 25 Bieyi za ahan Za ahan Other Chinese Pāli Sanskrit/Tibetan (T.100) (T.99) BZA016 ZA1077 T.02.0118.0508b20 MN II 97-105 Enomoto, The conversion of T.02.0119.0510b17 (86 Aṅgulimāla) 1994, no.1077* Aṅgulimāla T.02.0120.0512b8 Dhp 26 (Loka-vagga 173)* Hartmann, 1998 鴦掘魔羅歸命佛 T.02.0125.0719b20 Dhp-a III 169 (Tibetan: T.04.0202.0423b6 (Aṅgulimālattheravatthu)* Peking 879) T.04.0212.0703a23 Th 80 (Aṅgulimālattheragāthā)* BZA017 ZA1078 SN I 8-12 Enomoto, 1994, A deva tempts a monk (Samiddhi) no.1078* and is granted an interview with the Buddha 五欲是時佛法非時 BZA018 ZA1079 T.01.0095.0918b25 MN I 142-5 Enomoto, 1994, The parable of the T.02.0125.0733b12 (23.Vammīka) no.1079* smoking den 巢窟喻 BZA019 ZA1080 The Buddha sees a distracted monk 1 心意不定 BZA020 ZA1081 AN I 279-81 The Buddha sees a (Kaṭuviya) distracted monk 2 – The fl y simile 苦子喻 BZA021 ZA1082 A forest spirit admonishes a monk – The ulcer simile 以念覺覆瘡疣 BZA022 ZA1083 T.22.1428.0910b28* SN II 268-70 A monk visits the T.22.1428.0867c11* (Nāgo) village untimely – Parable of the elephant and the lotus roots 小象食藕後轉羸瘦 As we see, all BZA suttas of this fi rst fascicle have a parallel in the ZA.