Note: Contains critical editions of texts in Tibetan attributed to “Atiśa” Dīpaṃkarāśrījñāna, primarily those not focused on tantras, together with Japanese translations. Continue reading “Mochizuki, Dīpaṃkarāśrījñāna studies”
Adelheid Mette, Noriyuki Kudo, Ruriko Sakuma, Chanwit Tudkeao and Jiro Hirabayashi, eds. 2017. Gilgit Manuscripts in the National Archives of India, Facsimile Edition. Volume II.4: Further Mahāyānasūtras. New Delhi: The National Archives of India and Tokyo: The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University 創価大学 国際仏教学高等研究所. xliv pp + 151 pp of plates. ISBN 978-4-904234-15-0.
Series official site: http://iriab.soka.ac.jp/publication/
Schlosser, Andrea. 2013 . “On the Bodhisattva Path in Gandhāra. Edition of Fragment 4 and 11 from the Bajaur Collection of Kharoṣṭhī Manuscripts”. Freien Universität Berlin: PhD diss. 313+iv pp. URN: urn:nbn:de:kobv:188-fudissthesis000000101376-1 [PDF]
From the Abstract: This dissertation contains an edition, translation and study of two unparalleled Buddhist texts from ‘Greater Gandhāra’ (eastern Afghanistan and northwestern Pakistan), written in the Gāndhārī language and Kharoṣṭhī script and dating from the first or second century CE.
Bühnemann, Gudrun. 2015. Śākyamuni’s Return Journey to Lumbinī ( lumbinīyātrā ): A Study of a Popular Theme in Newar Buddhist Art and Literature. Bhairawaha, Nepal: Lumbini International Research Institute. 108 pp. ISBN: 978-9937-2-9462-1
Chan, Yiu-wing 陳耀榮. ‘An English translation of the Dharmatrāta-Dhyāna Sūtra (達摩多羅禪經 T15, no.618) — With Annotation and a Critical Introduction’. PhD diss., The University of Hong Kong, 2013. ix+548 pp. [official site]
From the Abstract
One of the early texts translated from Sanskrit into ancient Chinese in around 411 C.E. is called the Dharmatrāta-dhyāna-sūtra (T15, no.618) which was a detailed account of the meditational methods of Buddhasena and Dharmatrāta who were the two most renowned dhyāna teachers in Kaśmīra around 400C.E. They may be regarded as belonging to the tradition of the Sarvāstivāda Dārṣṭāntika masters who were characterized by their active interest in meditation and popular preaching in which they excelled in communicating through poems and allegories. […]
This sūtra essentially preserves the ancient Sarvāstivādin meditation teachniques. But it importantly incorporates Mahāyānistic-Tantric elements, such as the maṇḍala and visualization. […] As a result, it came to exert a great impact on the subsequent teaching and practice of Chinese Buddhism, particularly those of Buddhist meditation.
Seishi Karashima. ‘Was the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Compiled in Gandhāra in Gāndhārī?’ Annual Report of the International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology (ARIRIAB) at Soka University for the Academic Year 2012, vol.XVI, 2013, pp.171–188. [PDF]
This is a remarkable piece of detective work and a milestone in the study of the Mahāyāna, whether or not one thinks (as I do) that Prof. Karashima’s theory nails it. Karashima’s many years of lexicographical toil seem to have finally paid off: the earliest Chinese phonetic transcriptions from the Aṣṭasāhasrikā agree most fully with the newly found Gāndhārī fragments (for which see also Strauch 2007). And that, moreover, is merely one of many compelling indicators pointing to the composition of the text in Gandhāra.
One minor comment: the image of Dharmodgata discovering the Prajñāpāramitā written on gold plates vilīnena vaidūryeṇa — in “melted” lapis, according to Karashima (p.181) — sounds excessively fantastic. The reference is to lapis lazuli pigment, well known to medievalists as ultramarine, ‘beyond the sea’ — i.e., from Afghanistan.
Viehbeck, Markus. ‘The case of ‘Ju Mi pham (1846–1912) and Dpa’ ris Rab gsal (1840–1912): a study in Dgag lan Debate’. Dr. phil. Dissertation, Universität Wien, 2012. xxx+357 pp. [official site / PDF]
From the Abstract
The present dissertation is a case study in dgag lan debate, a specific form of debate that developed in Tibet, conducted through the exchange of texts. The dispute that is investigated evolved between the Rnying ma scholar ‘Ju Mi pham (1846–1912) and his Dge lugs opponent Dpa’ ris Rab gsal (1840–1912) and centres on the correct interpretation of the ninth chapter of the Bodhicaryāvatāra, an Indian work (7th–8th ct. CE) that is of pivotal importance to the understanding of Madhyamaka thought. Polemics were exchanged over a period of about 27 years and involved the composition of six treatises, which makes this particular debate one of the most extended cases of its kind.
Ulrich Timme Kragh (ed.) The Foundation for Yoga Practitioners: The Buddhist Yogācārabhūmi Treatise and Its Adaptation in India, East Asia, and Tibet. Harvard Oriental Series 75. “Available 07/22/2013”. ISBN 9780674725430.
From the Summary
“The present edited volume, conceived by Geumgang University in South Korea, brings together the scholarship of thirty-four leading Buddhist specialists on the Yogācārabhūmi from across the globe. The essays elaborate the background and environment in which the Yogācārabhūmi was composed and redacted, provide a detailed summary of the work, raise fundamental and critical issues about the text, and reveal its reception history in India, China, and Tibet. The volume also provides a thorough survey of contemporary Western and Asian scholarship on the Yogācārabhūmi in particular and the Yogācāra tradition more broadly.”
(Contains, among others [updated, 2013-05-01]:
H. Sakuma 佐久間秀範, ‘Remarks on the Lineage of Indian Masters of the Yogācāra School: Maitreya, Asaṅga, and Vasubandhu’, pp.330–366.
M. Delhey, ‘The Yogācārabhūmi Corpus: Sources, Editions, Translations, and Reference Works’, pp.498–561.)