APOCRYPHAL TEXTS IN CHINESE BUDDHISM T'IEN-T'AI CHIH-I'S USE OF APOCRYPHAL SCRIPTURES P.L. SWANS ON The Chinese Buddhist canon contains a large number of apocry­ phal texts; namely, scriptures that claim to be translations from the Sanskrit, but which are actually non-Indian (and sometimes Chinese) compositions or compilations. The list of such apocryphal scriptures includes many of the most important texts in East Asian Buddhist history. Although in recent decades there has been a growing conscious­ ness among scholars of the apocryphal nature of such works and an increasingly sophisticated analysis of their significance, most of the classical Buddhist commentators and sectarian founders show little or no awareness of this issue, and they quote the apocryphal texts with the same authority as they give other 'authentic' texts. I will first make some general comments concerning the Buddhist canon in East Asia, and then examine the use of apocryphal texts in the work of Chih-i (538-597), the founder of the T'ien-t'ai tradition and one of the most influential Buddhist thinkers of East Asian Buddhism. We will see that for East Asian Mahayana Buddhism, identifYing a text as apocryphal does not necessarily entail its removal from a defined scriptural canon, nor detract from its authority. The key to understanding the concept of a 'canon' in East Asian Mahayana Buddhism and the meaning of 'scripture' in the Buddhist tradition is to consider what is meant by 'the words of the Buddha' (buddha-vacana). I. The Chinese Buddhist Canon and East Asian Buddhism 1. General Comments The Chinese Buddhist 'canon' (Tripi!aka [san-tsang]) represents an enormous library of material, including both original Chinese com­ positions and works translated from a variety of Asian languages. It is comprised of sermons of the Buddha, biographies, philosophical treatises, recorded sayings of Buddhist masters, commentaries, moral 246 P.L. SWANSON precepts, ritual manuals, and much more.' Throughout the twenti­ eth century, the most widely used collection is the TaishO Shinshu Daizokyo (Newly revised Tripitaka of the Taisho era) which runs to some 100 volumes (each volume quite a bit longer than the Bible and Koran combined). But this is only one of many collections that have been compiled over the centuries, and there is little doubt that more collections will be assembled as lost or previously unknown texts continue to surface in places such as Tun-huang in China and Nanatsu-dera in Japan. Given the sheer volume of material and the broad sweep of history encompassed by the term 'Buddhist scrip­ ture', one may indeed wonder if it makes sense to speak of a 'canon' at all. Insofar as the term is applicable, however, there are certain general (though not necessarily unique) features that define its use in the East Asian Buddhist context. First, the Mahayana Buddhist canon is a relatively 'open' canon. Compared to the relatively 'closed' canon of Christianity or Islam, or even of Theravada Buddhism, it does not have a clear beginning or end. It is not bound by any historical period or geographical area. It is possible to continue to add to the Mahayana Buddhist canon; 'scripture' (or more accurately, the 'words of the Buddha' [buddha­ vacana]) is not limited to the actual words of the historical Buddha Sakyamuni. Especially in China there has been a plethora of so­ called apocryphal sutras: texts attributed to the historical Buddha and presented as translations from India, but actually produced in China. Perhaps the ideal behind this 'open canon' is best expressed in the Mahayana treatise Ta chih tu tun (itself apocryphally attributed to Nagatjuna!) that 'The Buddha-dharma is not limited to the words spoken by the Buddha; all true and good words . are part of the Buddha-dharma' (T 25.66b2-3). What makes a text canonical, then, is the fact that it is accepted into the Tripitaka collection by the tradition. In fact, however, much weight is attached to the words of the Buddha (or a Buddha); other­ wise, why bother composing a text and passing it off as a transla­ tion of the Buddha's words? Therefore, the concept of 'inspiration' or even 'revelation' and the authority implied by such origins is not totally absent. I For a good summary, see the essay on Buddhist canonization by Lewis Lancaster in The Encyclopedia qf Religjon, vol. 2 (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987), 504-9; see also Lancaster 1977: 145-51, and Lancaster 1978: 215-29. .