Abhidharma mahāvibhāṣaśāstra

Abhidharma mahāvibhāṣaśāstra (sanskrit; devanāgarī: अभिधर्म महाविभाष शास्त्र, tradisjonell kinesisk: 阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論, pinyin: āpí dámó dàpí póshā lùn, Wade-Giles: Ap'i tamo tap'i p'osha lun), ordrett «avhandling om det store kompendiet om Abhidharma», er en buddhistisk tekst fra skolen Vaibhāṣika. Den er antatt å ha blitt forfattet omkring 150 e.Kr.

Forfatterskapet tilskrives tradisjonelt 500 arhater. Sammensetningen av teksten, tilskrives Katyāyāniputra.

Tittelen

Teksten finnes ikke på tibetansk og er ikke bevart i den tibetanske buddhistiske kanon. Den rekonstruerte tittelen på wylie er bye brag bshad mdzod chen mo (བྱེ་བྲག་བཤད་མཛོད་ཆེན་མོ). Tittelen i THL Simplified Phonetic Transcription er jedrak shé dzö chenmo.

Fragmenter av teksten på sanskrit finnes i Pelliotsamlingen, men Abhidharma mahāvibhāṣaśāstra (अभिधर्म महाविभाष शास्त्र) er en rekonstruert tittel.

Teksten er bevart på kinesisk i den kinesiske buddhistiske kanon. Den er en massiv «mammut-tekst» på 200 bokruller. I størrelse blir den bare overgått av prajñāpāramitāsūtraen i 100 000 vers (400 bokruller).

Tittelen på tradisjonell kinesisk er 阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論, på pinyin er tittelen āpí dámó dàpí póshā lùn, og på Wade-Giles er tittelen Ap'i tamo tap'i p'osha lun.

Den omtales noen ganger under de forkortede titlene Dà pípóshā lùn (大毘婆沙論), Dà pípósuō lùn (大毘婆娑論) og póshā (婆沙).

Kinesisk oversettelse

Xuánzàng (玄奘, 602–664) oversatte teksten til kinesisk «mellom den 27. dagen i den 7. måneden i det første året og den 3. dagen i den 7. måned i det 4. året av Xiǎn qìng (顯慶) under Tang-dynastiet». Etter moderne tidsregning vil dette si fra 18. august 656 e. Kr. til 27. juli 659 e. Kr.

Forfatterskapet

Det tradisjonelle synet i kinesisk buddhisme er at teksten ble satt sammen av «500 store arhater» omkring 600 år etter Buddhas død og parinirvāṇa.

Åstedet for sammensetningen av dette kompendiet skal ha vært bystaten Kāśmīra (罽賓, Jìbīn) i det nordvestlige India. Dette antas å være identisk med Kashmir, selv om dette navnet har blitt brukt om flere bystater i det nordvestlige India og det sentrale Asia.

Sammensetningen av teksten tilskrives en viss Kātyāyanīputra (迦多衍尼子, Jiāduōyǎnnízí). Han omtales også som kātyāyana (迦旃, jiāzhān), mahākātyāyana og mahākātyāyanīputra.

Kātyāyanīputra var navnet på en av Buddhas 10 hoveddisipler. Men i dette tilfelle dreier det seg om en navnebror som tilhørte skolen sarvāstivāda. Han er tilskrevet forfatterskapet til en rekke banebrytende tekster, inkludert Abhidharma-jñānaprasthāna-śāstra og Abhidharma vibhāṣā śāstra, som er en kommentar til den førstnevnte.

Han virket i det andre århundre f. Kr. i det nordvestlige India og Kashmir.

Kashmir

罽賓 Jibin

Kashmir (Kāśmīra). Indian Buddhism in China from this period stemmed in large part from Jibin. Jibin was also the center of the Sarvâstivāda school 說一切有部 (Enomoto 1994: 357).

Pulleyblank (1962: 218) identifies this Jibin as '*Kaspir for Kashmir.' In the Eastern Jin (317–420) and Northern and Southern Dynasties (420–589) periods, Jibin could be understood as Kāśmīra 迦濕彌羅. The Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya 倶舍論 (T 1559) translated by Paramârtha 眞諦 (499–569) translates the Sanskrit kāśmīravaibhāṣikāṇāṃ as Jibin guo piposhashi 罽賓國毘婆沙師. Xuanzang 玄奘 (685–762) translates it as Jiashimiluo guo piposhazong 迦濕彌羅國毘婆沙宗. However, Enomoto notes that Jibin in these centuries indicated a wider area including Kāśmīra, Gandhāra and possibly Tokharestan. Over the course of the Sui-Tang period (581–907), Jibin ceased to refer to Kāśmīra. The Fanyu zaming 梵語雜名 (T 2135) defines Jibin as Karpiśaya 劫比舍也. The Sui shu 隋書 (fasc. 83) identifies Caoguo 漕國 (*Zabula) as the Jibin of Han times. The Xin Tang shu 新唐書 (fasc. 221) identifies Jibin as the Caoguo of the Sui period. A note in the Zhenyuan xinding shijiao mulu 貞元新定釋教目錄 (T 2157; fasc. 17) states that Jibin is a mistaken abbreviation of Kapiśā 迦畢試. The Ming shi 明史 (fasc. 332) identifies Samarkand 撒馬兒罕 as Jibin. Also written 罽賓國. See also 迦濕彌羅國. 〔四分律 T 1428.22.567b24, 倶舍論 T 1559.29.170a13〕 (Skt. Kaśmīra, Kāśmīra-pura)

Kuwayama Shōshin 桑山正進. 1990. Kāpishī = Gandāra shi kenkyūカーピシー=ガンダーラ史研究 . Kyoto: Institute for Research in Humanities.

Pulleyblank, E. G. 1962. “The Consonantal System of Old Chinese. Part II.” Asia Major 9 (2): 206–265.

Sanderson, Alexis. 2016. “Kashmir.” In Jacobsen, Knut A., Helene Basu, Angelika Malinar, Vasudha Narayanan, eds. Brillʼs Encyclopedia of Hinduism. Leiden: Brill Online.

Rest

Traditionally held to have been composed in Kashmir 罽賓 around the second century CE; the actual date is uncertain. A key philosophical treatise of the Kāśmīra Sarvâstivāda school which presents and argues against the theories of various other schools — though not held to be the earliest extant text of that school.

The Xuanzang translation of the *Mahāvibhāṣā is one of three texts of roughly the same name extant, all preserved in the Chinese canon. The others are the *Vibhāṣā-śāstra 鞞婆沙論 (T 1547) translated by *Saṃghabhūti/Saṃghabhadra 僧伽跋澄 et al. in 383; and the *Abhidharma-vibhāṣā-śāstra 阿毘曇毘婆沙論 (T 1546), translated by Buddhavarman 浮陀跋摩, Daotai 道泰 et al., in 437–439 CE. These works are obviously of a particular sort of historical interest as two of the three earliest Chinese translations from the early Sarvâstivāda Abhidharma corpus (the other being the Prakaraṇa-pāda translation by Guṇabhadra and Buddhayaśas, 衆事分阿毘曇論 T 1541).

All three extant Vibhāṣā present themselves as commentaries on the Jñānaprasthâna 阿毘達磨發智論 T 1544)/ *Aṣṭaskandha-śāstra (八犍度論 T 1543) (hereafter JñP; this text is counted as one of the 'seven [basic] treatises' 七論 of the Sarvâstivāda Abhidharma, along with the 'six feet/legs' 六足論). However, these three texts are considered not parallel versions of the same text, but rather exemplars of a genre called vibhāṣā. There is evidence that other texts existed in the same genre that are no longer extant (Willemen, Dessein and Cox 231). On the other hand, Willemen, Dessein and Cox report, on the basis of previous scholarship, that comparison of the Buddhavarman and Xuanzang versions of the text with a Sanskrit fragment in the Pelliot collection suggests that both are translations of the same basic text, and that between the Sanskrit, these two versions of the text, and the Saṃghabhūti, we have evidence of "at the very least, three distinction recensions of a vibhāṣā" (emphasis added). They further state that

the [Sanskrit] fragment represents a recension of the vibhāṣā [emphasis added] different from that represented by either Chinese translation, and... both of the Chinese translations represent expanded, and possibly later versions of the text

(233–234). Thus, it appears that relations between at least the texts represented by the latter two of the three Chinese translations are quite close, even if they do not represent exactly the same text.

The relationship between these various texts is further complicated by the fact that the Buddhavarman translation, originally in a hundred fascicles, was lost soon after its translation in a political disturbance of 439 CE, and it was only possible to partially restore it (to the extent of sixty fascicles) thereafter. The extant text is therefore reportedly only part of the original, fuller translation, and it only covers the first three of eight chapters of the Jñānaprasthâna (Willemen, Dessein and Cox, 232–233). In comparing the Buddhavarman and Xuanzang versions of the text, therefore, it is useful to bear in mind that we cannot normally expect anything appearing after p. 578a14 in Xuanzang (the beginning of JñP Ch. 4) to be matched in Buddhavarman.

The Saṃghabhūti text (*Vibhāṣāśāstra T 1547) is very different in structure from the other two extant Vibhāṣā, and comments only on two sections of the root text JñP; for details see Willemen, Dessein and Cox, 235, 228–229.

The authorship of the *Mahāvibhāṣā has sometimes traditionally been associated with the reign of the Kuṣāna King Kaniṣka (Willemen, Dessein and Cox 232), who may have been an important patron of Sarvâstivāda scholastic endeavors. It has been argued, however, on the basis of a mention of the name of this king in an anecdote in the text (昔健馱羅國迦膩色迦王, T 1545.27.593a15) that it must in fact post-date him; see Ōnishi Yoshinori, “Is the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra Really Arguing against the Sarvâstivādins?” Buddhist Studies Review 16, 2 (1999), 169. Another interesting argument about the date of the text relative to other materials has been advanced by Akanuma Chizen, who argues somewhat tenuously, on the basis of a single sentence in the text that he reads as referring to the prajñāpāramitā literature (此中般若說名方廣, T 1545.27.660a29) that at least some version of the prajñāpāramitā must have been known to its authors; see Hanayama Shōyū, “A Summary of Various Research on the Prajñāpāramitā Literature by Japanese Scholars,” Acta Asiatica 10 (1966), 55.

The contents of significant portions of the *Mahāvibhāṣā have been summarized in a series of articles in Japanese by Kawamura Kōshō 河村孝照 (bibliographic details of these articles may be found by searching the INBUDS database at http://www.inbuds.net/jpn/index.html under Kawamuraʼs name). Willemen, Dessein and Cox (239) also give a reference to a detailed outline of the text by Fukuhara Ryōgon 福原亮厳, in his Ubu Abhidastuma ronsho no hattatsu 有部阿毘達磨論書の発達 (Kyoto: Nagata Bunshōdō 1965), 529–598. Numerous further references to prior studies, Numerous further references to prior studies, especially in Japanese, and other bibliographic aids, may be found in Willemen, Dessein and Cox. In his Riven by Lust: Incest and Schism in Indian Buddhist Legend and Historiography (University of Hawai`i Press, 2009), Jonathan A. Silk studies a very interesting instance of the working methods of the Vibhāṣā authors, in the particular instance of the Mahādeva narrative. See further 大天.

References:

Willemen, Charles, Bart Dessein and Collett Cox. 1998. Sarvâstivāda Buddhist Scholasticism. Leiden: Brill. See esp. 229-239.

Fotnoter

Type nummerering

Kilder

• Dessein, Bart (15. august 2022). «Kātyāyanīputra and the Large Commentary (Mahāvibhāṣā). The Development of Abhidharma Literature and of a Sarvāstivāda Self-identity». I Edelglass, William; Harter, Pierre-Julien; McClintock, Sara. The Routledge Handbook of Indian Buddhist Philosophy. Routledge, London. eBook ISBN 9781351030908 , DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351030908. CS1-vedlikehold: Flere navn: redaktørliste (link)
• Digital Dictionary of Buddhism (15. september 1997). 阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論 Basic Meaning: Treatise of the Great Commentary on the Abhidharma. Digital Dictionary of Buddhism, buddhism-dict.net, oppdatert 13. oktober 2018. 
• Digital Dictionary of Buddhism (1. september 1993). 迦多衍尼子 Basic Meaning: Kātyāyanīputra. Digital Dictionary of Buddhism, buddhism-dict.net, oppdatert 11. februar 2021. 
• Digital Dictionary of Buddhism (8. september 2001). 罽賓 Basic Meaning: Jibin. Digital Dictionary of Buddhism, buddhism-dict.net, oppdatert 17. mai 2018. 
• Enmoto, Fumio. (1994). «A Note on Kashmir as Referred to in Chinese Literature: Ji-bin». I Ikari, Yasuke. Nīlamata: A Study on the Nīlamata: Aspects of Hinduism in Ancient Kashmir. Kyoto: Institute for Research in Humanities. s. 357-365. 
• Kuwayama Shōshin (桑山正進) (1990). Kāpishī = Gandāra shi kenkyūカーピシー=ガンダーラ史研究. Kyoto: Institute for Research in Humanities. 
• Potter, Karl H. (1. januar 2011). Abhidharma Buddhism to 150 A.D. The Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, Volume 7, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited. s. 511-569. ISBN ‎978 8120808959. 
• Rigpawiki (5. mai 2021). bye brag bshad mdzod chen mo (བྱེ་བྲག་བཤད་མཛོད་ཆེན་མོ). Tibetan-English Dictionary, Dharma Glossaries and Resources. 
• Lancaster, Lewis R.; Park, Sung-bae (2004). Volumes 799-838 (chüan 369-388), K 952 (XXVI:1) (T. 1545) (H. 1275). The Korean Buddhist Canon: A Descriptive Catalogue. CS1-vedlikehold: Flere navn: forfatterliste (link)
• Wittern, Christian (2. desember 2002). T27N1544 阿毘達磨發智論 a1 pi2 da2 mo2 fa1 zhi4 lun4 あびだつまほっちろん. WWW Database of Chinese Buddhist texts, versjon 2A. 
• Wittern, Christian (2. desember 2002). T27N1545 阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論 a1 pi2 da2 mo2 da4 pi2 po2 sha1 lun4 あびだつまだいびばしゃろん. WWW Database of Chinese Buddhist texts, versjon 2A. 
• Wittern, Christian (2. desember 2002). T27N1546 阿毘曇毘婆沙論 a1 pi2 tan2 pi2 po2 sha1 lun4 あびどんびばしゃろん. WWW Database of Chinese Buddhist texts, versjon 2A. 
• Wittern, Christian (2. desember 2002). T55N2154 開元釋教録 kai1 yuan2 shi4 jiao4 lu4 かいげんしゃっきょうろ. WWW Database of Chinese Buddhist texts, versjon 2A. 

Denne artikkelen er en spire. Du kan hjelpe Wikipedia ved å utvide den.

Autoritetsdata