A Comprehensive Study on the Sanskrit Karmavibhanga
| Project/Area Number |
16520047
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Indian philosophy/Buddhist studies
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Soka University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
KUDO Noriyuki Soka University, The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Associate Professor, 国際仏教学高等研究所, 助教授 (70260122)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2004 – 2006
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2006)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,200,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,200,000)
Fiscal Year 2006: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000)
Fiscal Year 2005: ¥700,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000)
Fiscal Year 2004: ¥800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | Karmavibhanga / Nepalese manuscript / Schoyen Collection / Sylvain Levi / Hemraj Sharman / 『カルマ・ヴィバンガ』 / 「鸚鵡経類」 |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
In 2004Iconcentrated on the study of the textual problem of this Karmavibhanga. Based on my research, I could draw a conclusion about the textual history of the KV and its interrelationship among the "Sukasutra-class": Myinvestigation of all the materials of the KV reveals that there have been at least two recensions in Sanskrit; the third version of the Tibetan translation is exclusively included in several Tibetan manuscript Kanjurs of the Them spang ma lineage and this version had probably been replaced by the enlarged Tibetan version [= Tibl] (which corresponds to the Sanskrit KV and is included in the Kanjurs of the Thai pa lineage) at a certain time of its textual trasmission in Tibet. In 2005, new textual material is treated for the first time. It is included in so-called "Schoyen Collection" and consists of seven fragments; later I was able to combine five fragments into one folio. As a result, we can recover three sections corresponding to the KV; however, the order of the sec
… More
tions and the descriptions they contain are completely different from those of the known versions of the KV. Moreover, there are no quotations. This suggests that there had been one more recension of the Sanskrit KV besides the recension represented by MS[C], a Nepalese manuscript. Besides this material from North-west India, materials from Nepal are also found. One is the lost folios of the B manuscript of the Karmavibhanga and the other is a manuscript which seems to be a direct copy of the B manuscript. This finding proves again the more than two recensions in Sanskrit text. Furthermore, two notebooks prepared by a Nepal scholar at the request of the first editor of this text, Sylvain Levi, are also found in the National Archives of Nepal. As a result of reading both (original manuscripts and notebooks), in the apparatus criticus in the first edition we find a number of omissions of variant readings and instances where the variant reading itself differs from that of manuscript. I could conclude, therefore, that a number of scribal errors and Sankritizations had occurred in the process of making the copies. In 2006, I could collect almost all the Sanskrit materials of this text and so it made me possible to prepare all the basic data in digital form. Less
|
Report
(4 results)
Research Products
(18 results)
