[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [金剛般若疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1699) › 1.16 # 金剛般若疏 1.16 金剛般若疏 1.16 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1699.1.16) 第七、辨傳譯。問：《大悲比丘尼本願經》末記云：金剛般若本有八卷，今唯有〈格量功德〉一品。此事云何？答：義不應爾。所以者何？此一卷經具有三人翻譯：一者、羅什法師弘始四年，於逍遙園正翻一卷。若有八卷，何不翻譯之？二者、流支三藏於此土重復翻譯，經之與論合有三卷，而經長有信者一章，論解釋始終事義既畢，初則明經緣起歸敬之義，末則表隨喜讚歎功德。若有八卷，何因緣故止解一品？三者、真諦三藏於嶺南重翻此經，文小意廣，不云有八卷。又且此經序、正、流通三分具足，何得止言一品？問：《大悲比丘尼本願經》末記又云：初說大品，小品出其中；後說光讚，道行出其中。此事云何？答：是亦不然。道行由是小品之異名。《大智論》前列光讚、放光、道行，後復列云小品、放光、光讚，故知小品即道行之異稱也。叡公《小品．序》云「此經三十章，貫之以道，故稱道行。」當知道行由是小品。 > Seventh, determining transmission and translation. Question: The postscript to the Mahākāruṇikā-bhikṣuṇī-pūrvapraṇidhāna Sūtra says that the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā originally had eight fascicles, and now there is only one chapter, 'Appraising the Merit'. What of this? Answer: In principle, it should not be so. Why? This one-fascicle sūtra has translations by three people: First, Dharma Master Kumārajīva, in the fourth year of Hongshi, accurately translated one fascicle at the Xiaoyao Garden. If there were eight fascicles, why did he not translate them? Second, the Tripiṭaka Master Bodhiruci retranslated it in this land; the sūtra together with the commentary comprise three fascicles, and the sūtra additionally has a section on the faithful, while the commentary thoroughly explains the matter and principle from beginning to end—at the beginning it explains the origin and the meaning of taking refuge and revering, and at the end it demonstrates the merit of rejoicing in accord and praising. If there were eight fascicles, for what reason would it only explain one chapter? Third, the Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha retranslated this sūtra south of the Ranges; the text is concise and the meaning expansive, and he did not say there were eight fascicles. Moreover, this sūtra is fully equipped with the three divisions—preface, core text, and transmission; how could one say it is only a single chapter? Question: The postscript to the Mahākāruṇikā-bhikṣuṇī-pūrvapraṇidhāna Sūtra also says: 'First he preached the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā, and the Aṣṭasāhasrikā came out of it; later he preached the Guangzan, and the Daoxing came out of it.' What of this? Answer: This is also not so. The Daoxing is simply another name for the Aṣṭasāhasrikā. The \*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa first lists Guangzan, Fangguang, and Daoxing, and later lists Aṣṭasāhasrikā (Xiaopin), Fangguang, and Guangzan; thus we know that Xiaopin is just another name for Daoxing. Master Sengrui's 'Preface to the Xiaopin' states: 'This sūtra has thirty chapters, connected throughout by the Way (dao), hence it is called Daoxing.' One should know that Daoxing is simply the Xiaopin. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1699.1.15) - [Next: 1.17](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1699.1.17) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1699.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1699~en-mt.1.16) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1699.1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1699.1.16) · Pramāṇa