漢訳『菩薩十地経』考 : 同系統の二経との比較考察
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
This paper examines and compares three Chinese translations said to belong to the same scriptural category of the Bodhisattvadasabhumikasutra: (A) Pusa shi di jing 菩薩十地經 translated by Kihkara 吉迦夜, who arrived in China in the second half of the 5^<th> century. (B) Zhuangyan putixin jing 莊嚴慧菩薩會 translated by Kumarajlva 鳩 摩羅什. (C) Wujinhui pusa hui 無儘慧菩薩會(The Forty-fifth Collection of the Mahdratnakutasutra 大寶積經) translated by Bodhiruci 菩提流志. This is a version which I have newly identified as belonging to this scriptural category. Here are the conclusions yielded by my present study: (1) The historical order of the formation of these texts is: B→A→C. I assume that the originals, which most probably were written in Sanskrit, must have been compiled in the same order. (2) Text A and Text B are considerably similar. We find, however, substantial differences between Texts A and B, on the one hand, and Text C, on the other. For example, this can be clearly seen in the fact that Texts A and B rely upon the doctrine of the Seven Perfections(sapta parmitah 七波羅蜜), which also includes the Perfection of Skilful Means (upayapdramita 方便波羅蜜), while Text C adopts the theory of the Ten Perfections(dasa parmitah 十波羅蜜). We must, however, note here that the order of the Ten Perfections seen in Text C is different from the general model of this theory. In Text C, the Perfection of Power(balaparmita 力波羅蜜) appears as the eighth Perfection, and the Perfection of Vow(pranidhanaparamita 願波羅蜜) as the ninth. This may reflect an alternative version of the Ten Perfections theory which probably circulated in Indian and Central Asian Mahayana Buddhism after the second half of the 5^<th> century. (3) The basic purport of the Ur-text of all the three textual versions was to show what the aspiration for Awakening(bodhicitta 菩提心) is and how it actually relates to all the seven Perfections up to the Perfection of Skilful Means. In this sense, the title of Text B, i.e. The Scripture on the Adorned Aspiration for Awakening, most aptly reflects the content. (4) The title of Text A, i.e. The Scripture on the Ten Stages of the Bodhisattva, highlights the theme of the Ten Stages, which indeed is a doctrine occurring in all the three versions. There is no doubt that all our texts are very important materials for elucidating the development of the doctrine of Ten Stages in Mahayana Buddhism. However, the texts seem more concerned with linking the aspiration for Awakening with such concepts and practices as the Perfections, contemplations(samadhi 三昧), and dharani 陀羅尼, rather than focusing upon the Ten Stages. One could surmise that the choice of the title of Text A had more to do with the historical background rather than the content of the sutra. One possibility is that the doctrine of the Ten Stages may have been very popular in the region where Text B was modified and edited to become Text A. (5) It is still unclear how Text C came to be compiled and why it became included in the Maharatnakutasutra or at least, in Bodhiruci's Chinese translation of this collection. More light on these problems will, no doubt, be shed when we have more studies on the Maharatnakutasutra in general.