[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) › [貞元新定釋教目錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2157) › 12.20.4 # 貞元新定釋教目錄 12.20.4 貞元新定釋教目錄 12.20.4 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [12.20.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2157.12.20.4) 破薛舉之戰場也。立識敏才俊神清道遠。 習林遠之高風。邁肇融之識量。聲譽聞徹。 勅召充大慈恩寺翻經大德。次補西明寺都 維那。後授太原寺主。皆降綸旨令維寺住。 天皇之代頻召入內。與黃冠對論皆愜。 帝旨。事在別傳。立以玄奘法師求經印度 經無紀述季代罕聞。遂撰慈恩三藏行傳。未 成而卒。後弘福寺沙門彥琮續而成之。總成 十卷。故初題云沙門惠立本釋彥琮箋。 四分比丘戒本一卷（題云四分戒本并序西太原寺沙門懷素集） 四分比丘尼戒本一卷（題加尼字餘同前） 四分僧羯磨三卷（題云羯磨卷上并序出四分西太原寺沙門懷素集） 四分尼羯磨三卷（題加尼字餘同前） 右四部八卷其本並在。 沙門懷素。俗姓范氏。京兆人。世襲冠冕。貞 觀十九年出家師奘法師為弟子。而立性聰 敏專尋經論。進具之後偏隷毘尼。依道成 律師學四分律。不淹時序而為上首。先居弘 濟後住太原。學侶雲奔教授無輟。以先德所 集多不依文率己私見妄生增減。遂乃撿尋 律藏抄出戒心羯磨。但取成文非妄穿鑿。可 謂嗣徽迦葉繼軌波離而已焉。又別撰四分 記抄兼經論疏記等五十餘卷行於代。 大方廣圓覺修多羅了義經一卷 右一部一卷其本見在。 沙門佛陀跋多羅。唐云覺救。北印度罽賓人 也。於東都白馬寺譯圓覺了義經一部。此近 出不委何年。且弘道為懷務甄詐妄。但真詮 不謬豈假具知年耶。 佛頂尊勝陀羅尼經一卷（第三出與杜顗等出者同本見大周錄及經前序） 右一部一卷其本見在。 沙門佛陀波利。唐言覺護。北印度罽賓國人。 忘身侚道遍觀靈跡。聞文殊師利在清涼山。 遠涉流沙躬來禮謁。以。 天皇儀鳳元年景子杖錫五臺虔誠禮拜。悲 泣雨淚望覩聖容。倐焉見一老翁從山中出 來。作婆羅門語。謂波利曰。師精誠懇惻何所 求耶。波利答曰。聞文殊大士隱跡此山。從印 度來欲求瞻禮。翁曰師從彼國將佛頂尊勝 陀羅尼經來不。此土眾生多造諸罪。出家之 輩亦多所犯。佛頂神呪除罪祕方。若不將經 徒來何益。縱見文殊何必能識。師可還西國 取彼經來流傳此土。即是遍奉眾聖。廣利群 生拯濟幽冥。報諸。 佛恩也。師取經來至此弟子當示師文殊師 利菩薩所在。波利聞此語已不勝喜躍。遂裁 抑悲淚向山更禮。舉頭之頃忽不見老人。波 利驚愕倍增虔敬。遂返歸本國取得經來。既 達。 帝城便求進見。有司具狀。 聞奏。 天皇賞其精誠崇斯祕典。遂詔鴻臚寺典客 令杜行顗及日照三藏於內共譯。譯訖䞋絹 三十匹。經留在內。波利因乃垂泣奏曰。委棄 身命志在利人。請布流行是所誠望。 帝愍其專至遂留所譯之經還其梵本任將流 布。波利得經不勝喜躍。將向西明寺訪得善 梵語僧順貞奏共翻譯。 帝允其請。遂對翻經大德圓測共貞翻出。名 佛頂尊勝陀羅尼。與前杜令所翻之者。呪韻 經文大同小異。波利所願已畢持經梵本入 於五臺于今不出。莫知所之。比諸眾譯此最 弘布。 （准經前序乃云永淳二年迴至西京具狀聞奏。其年即共順貞再譯名佛頂尊勝陀羅尼經。今尋此說年月稍乖。其杜令 譯者乃儀鳳四年正月五日也日照再譯乃永淳元年五月十三日也。既云永淳二年方達唐境。前之二本從何而 得。又永淳二年天皇已幸東都。如何乃云在京譯出。其序復是永昌已後有人迷記却敘前事。致有參差。此波利譯者 不可依序定其年月也）。 > ... battlefield where Xue Ju was defeated. \[Hui\]li possessed acute understanding and exceptional talent; his spirit was pure, and his path was far-reaching. He emulated the noble demeanor of \[Hui\]lin and \[Hui\]yuan, and surpassed the breadth of understanding of Sengzhao and Daorong. His renown was widely heard. By imperial decree, he was summoned to serve as a Translation Virtuoso of Great Cien Monastery. Next, he was appointed Rector (karmadāna) of Ximing Monastery. Later, he was conferred \[the position of\] Abbot of Taiyuan Monastery; in each case, imperial edicts were issued commanding him to manage monastic affairs. During the reign of Emperor Tianhuang (Gaozong), he was repeatedly summoned to the imperial palace to debate with Daoist priests, and in each case, he satisfied the imperial will; the details are recorded in his separate biography. Considering that Master of the Dharma Xuanzang had sought scriptures in India yet had no chronicle or account, so that in subsequent eras it would rarely be heard of, Li composed the \*Biography of the Tripiṭaka \[Master of\] Cien \[Monastery\]\*. Before it was completed, he passed away. Later, Śramaṇa Yanzong of Hongfu Monastery continued and completed it, making ten fascicles in total. Hence, the initial title states: 'Composed by Śramaṇa Huili; Annotated by Śramaṇa Yanzong.' > > \*Sifen biqiu jieben\* (Four-Part Bhikṣu Prātimokṣa), one fascicle (entitled \*Sifen jieben\*, with a preface, compiled by Śramaṇa Huaiyin of West Taiyuan Monastery) > \*Sifen biqiuni jieben\* (Four-Part Bhikṣuṇī Prātimokṣa), one fascicle (the character 'ni' is added to the title; the rest is the same as above) > \*Sifen seng jiemo\* (Four-Part Saṅgha Karmavācanā), three fascicles (entitled \*Jiemo, Fascicle One\*, with a preface, extracted from the \*Four-Part \[Vinaya\]\*, compiled by Śramaṇa Huaisu of West Taiyuan Monastery) > \*Sifen ni jiemo\* (Four-Part Bhikṣuṇī Karmavācanā), three fascicles (the character 'ni' is added to the title; the rest is the same as above) > The four works above, in eight fascicles, are all extant. > > Śramaṇa Huaisu, secular surname Fan, was a native of Jingzhao. His family had held official caps and sashes for generations. In the nineteenth year of Zhenguan, he went forth from household life and took Master of the Dharma \[Xuan\]zang as his teacher to become his disciple. By nature he was intelligent and acute, dedicating himself to investigating sūtras and śāstras. After receiving full ordination, he devoted himself exclusively to the vinaya. He studied the \*Four-Part Vinaya\* under Vinaya Master Daocheng; within no time, he became the foremost student. He first resided at Hongji \[Monastery\] and later stayed at Taiyuan \[Monastery\]. Students flocked to him like clouds, and his instruction never ceased. Considering that what earlier worthies had compiled mostly did not adhere to the text and arbitrarily made additions or deletions according to private opinions, he investigated the Vinayapiṭaka and excerpted the core precepts and karmavācanā rituals, only adopting established texts without making arbitrary interpretations. He may truly be said to have inherited the brilliance of Kāśyapa and followed the footsteps of Upāli. He also separately composed notes and excerpts on the \*Four-Part \[Vinaya\]\*, as well as commentaries and notes on sūtras and śāstras in more than fifty fascicles, which circulate in his generation. > > \*Da fangguang yuanjue xiuduoluo liaoyi jing\* (Mahāvaipulya Great Perfect Enlightenment Sūtra of Definitive Meaning), one fascicle > The one work above, in one fascicle, is currently extant. > > Śramaṇa Fotuobatuoluo (Buddhabhadra), in Tang called Juejiu (Awakened Savior), was a native of Kashmīr in North India. At Baima Monastery in the Eastern Capital, he translated the one work \*Yuanjue liaoyi jing\*. This was recently produced, and the exact year is not detailed. Moreover, taking the propagation of the Way as his purpose, he made it his task to distinguish the spurious from the authentic; as long as the true teaching is without error, why must one fully know the year? > > \*Foding zunsheng tuoluoni jing\* (Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī-sūtra), one fascicle (third translation, the same text as that produced by Du Xingyi and others; see the \*Great Zhou Catalogue\* and the preface before the sūtra) > The one work above, in one fascicle, is currently extant. > > Śramaṇa Fotuoboli (Buddhāpāli), in Tang called Juehu (Awakened Protector), was a native of the country of Kashmīr in North India. Forgetting his own body and devoting himself to the Way, he visited sacred sites everywhere. Having heard that Mañjuśrī was at Mount Qingliang, he crossed the drifting sands from afar to come in person to pay homage. In the first year of the Yifeng era of Emperor Tianhuang (676), a \*bingzi\* year, carrying his monk's staff to Mount Wutai, he reverently made prostrations. Weeping tears of sorrow, he hoped to behold the holy visage. Suddenly, he saw an old man emerge from within the mountain. Speaking in the language of the Brāhmaṇas, he said to Pāli: 'Master, with such sincere earnestness and deep grief, what do you seek?' Pāli replied, 'I heard that the Great Being Mañjuśrī conceals his traces on this mountain, so I have come from India desiring to behold and worship him.' The old man said: 'Master, did you bring the \*Uṣṇīṣavijayā-dhāraṇī-sūtra\* from that country or not? The sentient beings of this land create many sins, and those who have gone forth also frequently commit transgressions. The divine dhāraṇī of the Buddha-Uṣṇīṣa is a secret recipe for eliminating sins. If you have not brought the sūtra, what benefit is there in coming in vain? Even if you saw Mañjuśrī, how would you necessarily be able to recognize him? Master, you may return to the Western countries, obtain that sūtra, and circulate it in this land; that would indeed be making offerings everywhere to all the holy ones, widely benefiting all living beings, saving those in the dark realms, and requiting the kindness of all the Buddhas. Once you have fetched the scripture and arrived here, this disciple will point out to you where the Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī is.' Having heard these words, Pāli could not contain his joy. Thereupon, restraining his sorrowful tears, he bowed again toward the mountain. In the time it took to raise his head, the old man suddenly vanished. Pāli was astonished and redoubled his reverent devotion. He then returned to his native country, obtained the scripture, and brought it back. Having reached the imperial capital, he immediately requested an audience. The authorities reported the circumstances to the throne. Emperor Tianhuang appreciated his sincere devotion and revered this secret scripture. Thereupon, he decreed that Du Xingyi, Director of Foreign Affairs at the Court of State Ceremonial, and the Tripiṭaka \[Master\] Rizhao (Divākara) translate it together within the palace. When the translation was completed, thirty bolts of silk were bestowed as an offering, but the scripture was retained within the palace. Pāli therefore wept and memorialized: 'Discarding my body and life, my ambition was to benefit others. I request that it be distributed and circulated; this is my earnest hope.' The Emperor pitied his single-minded dedication, so he retained the translated scripture and returned the Indic text to him, allowing him to take and circulate it. Having obtained the scripture, Pāli was overjoyed. Taking it toward Ximing Monastery, he found a monk named Shunzheng who was skilled in Sanskrit, and memorialized to translate it together. The Emperor granted his request. Thereupon, together with the Translation Virtuoso Yuance and \[Shun\]zheng, he translated it, entitling it \*Foding zunsheng tuoluoni\*. Compared to the one previously translated by Director Du, the mantra sounds and scripture text were broadly similar with minor differences. Pāli's wish having been fulfilled, he took the Indic text of the scripture and entered Mount Wutai, not emerging down to the present day; no one knows where he went. Compared with the various translations, this one is the most widely distributed. > (According to the preface before the scripture, it says that in the second year of Yongchun \[683\] he returned to the Western Capital and reported the circumstances to the throne, and that in that year he translated it again with Shunzheng under the title \*Foding zunsheng tuoluoni jing\*. Now investigating this account, the dates are somewhat contradictory. The one translated by Director Du was on the fifth day of the first month of the fourth year of Yifeng \[679\], and Rizhao's second translation was on the thirteenth day of the fifth month of the first year of Yongchun \[682\]. Since it says that he only reached the Tang territory in the second year of Yongchun, from where were the previous two versions obtained? Furthermore, in the second year of Yongchun, Emperor Tianhuang had already visited the Eastern Capital; how could it say that it was translated in the capital? That preface was written after the Yongchang era \[689\] by someone whose memory was confused when retrospectively recounting former matters, resulting in discrepancies. The date of this translation by Pāli cannot be determined based on that preface.) > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 12.20.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2157.12.20.3) - [Next: 12.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2157.12.21) - [Up: 12.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2157.12.20) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2157~en-mt.12.20.4) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (3) - [翻譯名義集](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2131.1.239) — 法雲, Classical Chinese - [開元釋教錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2154.9.3.3) — 智昇, Classical Chinese - [續古今譯經圖紀](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2152.1.12) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2157.12.20.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2157.12.20.4) · Pramāṇa