| Research Abstract |
I have studied Lokaksema's Chinese translation of the Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita, completed in 179 C.E. and compared this with the other six Chinese translations, the Sanskrit version (based on manuscripts from Nepal), Sanskrit fragments from Afghansistan and the Tibetan translation. Through reading this very difficult text painstakingly, I have come to realize the necessity of compiling a glossary and a critical edition which I am, at present, doing. These will be ready in a few years time. Also, after three years' research, I have concluded that the Chinese, Sanskrit and Tibetan varsions could be divided into the following two groups, namely: (I) the four older Chinese translations (by Lokaksema, Zhiqian, Zhufonian and Kumarajiva) and one of Xuanzang's Chinese translations; (II) the Sanskrit version (based on manuscripts from Nepal), another one of Xuanzang's translations, Shihu's Chinese translation and the Tibetan translation. The texts of the latter group contain many interpolations, showing traces of enlargement. As to the Sanskrit fragments from Afghanistan, we need to investigate them further before reaching any concrete conclusions.
I have published several articles concerning the text both in Japanese and Chinese. However, as Lokaksema's translation of the Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita is voluminous, I need another two years to complete the glossary, the critical edition of this translation and a comparative study of the Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita. Based on such a comprehensive and thorough philological study of the text, it would be possible to pursue historical research on this and so expand our understanding of early Mahayana Buddhism. Also, it is hoped that, with the publication of these, other early Chinese translations, made by Lokaksema, Zhiqian, Dharmaraksa etc., will become less difficult to read.
|
