Articles by alphabetic order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
 Ā Ī Ñ Ś Ū Ö Ō
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0


Difference between revisions of "The Seventeen Works Attributed to the Indian Buddhist Scholar Sthiramati"

From Tibetan Buddhist Encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with " « The Seventeen Works Attributed to the Indian Buddhist Scholar Sthiramati » The four sessions focused on the scriptural corpus of Sthiramati, a pivot...")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
 +
 +
 +
  
 
« The Seventeen Works Attributed  to the [[Indian Buddhist]] [[Scholar]] [[Sthiramati]] »
 
« The Seventeen Works Attributed  to the [[Indian Buddhist]] [[Scholar]] [[Sthiramati]] »
  
The four sessions focused on the [[scriptural]] corpus of [[Sthiramati]], a pivotal [[scholar]] in the [[development]] of [[Indian]] [[Yogācāra]] [[thought]] in the 6th century. So far [[Sthiramati’s]] work has received far less [[attention]] from {{Wiki|modern}} [[scholars]] than the treatises of other [[Yogācāra]] authors like [[Asaṅga]] or Vasubandhu—probably because of the [[perception]] of [[Sthiramati]] as a commentator and not as an original author in his [[own]] right. However, as we have tried to show in a recently published paper, the {{Wiki|classification}} of a text as a “commentary” does not necessarily imply that the text is less original or innovative than a work not belonging to the {{Wiki|commentarial}} genre. Conversely, [[root texts]], as for instance [[Vasubandhu’s]] [[Pañcaskandhaka]], are often likewise characterized by the restructuring and summarizing of known [[doctrines]], rather than by the introduction of completely new [[Wikipedia:concept|concepts]]. Commentators like [[Sthiramati]] have shaped the [[doctrinal]] [[development]] of the [[Yogācāra tradition]] by introducing new [[Wikipedia:concept|concepts]] and reorganizing previous teachings to a similar extent as ‘{{Wiki|independent}}’ authors like [[Vasubandhu]]. Privileging {{Wiki|independent}} texts over {{Wiki|commentarial}} works in {{Wiki|academia}} reflects our [[own]] presuppositions and is not justified.
+
The four sessions focused on the [[scriptural]] corpus of [[Sthiramati]], a pivotal [[scholar]] in the [[development]] of [[Indian]] [[Yogācāra]] [[thought]] in the 6th century. So far [[Sthiramati’s]] work has received far less [[attention]] from {{Wiki|modern}} [[scholars]] than the treatises of other [[Yogācāra]] authors like [[Asaṅga]] or Vasubandhu—probably because of the [[perception]] of [[Sthiramati]] as a commentator and not as an original author in his [[own]]  
 +
 
 +
right. However, as we have tried to show in a recently published paper, the {{Wiki|classification}} of a text as a “commentary” does not necessarily imply that the text is less original or innovative than a work not belonging to the {{Wiki|commentarial}} genre. Conversely, [[root texts]], as for instance [[Vasubandhu’s]] [[Pañcaskandhaka]], are often likewise characterized by the restructuring and summarizing of known [[doctrines]], rather than by the  
 +
 
 +
introduction of completely new [[Wikipedia:concept|concepts]]. Commentators like [[Sthiramati]] have shaped the [[doctrinal]] [[development]] of the [[Yogācāra tradition]] by introducing new [[Wikipedia:concept|concepts]] and reorganizing previous teachings to a similar extent as ‘{{Wiki|independent}}’ authors like [[Vasubandhu]]. Privileging {{Wiki|independent}} texts over {{Wiki|commentarial}} works in {{Wiki|academia}} reflects our [[own]] presuppositions and is not justified.
  
 
The four [[teaching]] sessions were devoted to the {{Wiki|examination}} of the seventeen works ascribed to [[Sthiramati]] and of the main [[doctrines]] propagated in these texts. While most of the commentaries among the seventeen works are written on works belonging to the [[Yogācāra tradition]], two of them refer to early [[Mahāyāna sūtras]] without a specific [[Yogācāra]] background, namely the Akṣayamatinirdeśaṭīkā and the *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā. As [[Indian]] commentaries on [[Mahāyāna sūtras]] are rare in general, the two works represent important sources for the [[understanding]] of the [[development]] of the [[Mahāyāna]] and have been discussed in particular detail in two of the four [[teaching]] sessions. The [[investigation]] of their contents and style allows to better assess their place within the [[Yogācāra school]] and their position in the history of [[Buddhist]] [[thought]]. Being mostly known for his commentaries, [[Sthiramati]]  
 
The four [[teaching]] sessions were devoted to the {{Wiki|examination}} of the seventeen works ascribed to [[Sthiramati]] and of the main [[doctrines]] propagated in these texts. While most of the commentaries among the seventeen works are written on works belonging to the [[Yogācāra tradition]], two of them refer to early [[Mahāyāna sūtras]] without a specific [[Yogācāra]] background, namely the Akṣayamatinirdeśaṭīkā and the *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā. As [[Indian]] commentaries on [[Mahāyāna sūtras]] are rare in general, the two works represent important sources for the [[understanding]] of the [[development]] of the [[Mahāyāna]] and have been discussed in particular detail in two of the four [[teaching]] sessions. The [[investigation]] of their contents and style allows to better assess their place within the [[Yogācāra school]] and their position in the history of [[Buddhist]] [[thought]]. Being mostly known for his commentaries, [[Sthiramati]]  
Line 11: Line 19:
 
is also supposed (in the [[Tibetan tradition]]) to have composed seven [[Tantric]] works. It can be stated with some {{Wiki|certainty}} that they have been authored by a different {{Wiki|individual}} than the author of the [[philosophical]] commentaries.
 
is also supposed (in the [[Tibetan tradition]]) to have composed seven [[Tantric]] works. It can be stated with some {{Wiki|certainty}} that they have been authored by a different {{Wiki|individual}} than the author of the [[philosophical]] commentaries.
  
The first [[teaching]] session (Introduction into [[Sthiramati’s]] Œuvre [lecture]) gave an overview of the seventeen works ascribed to the author [[Sthiramati]] in [[Indian]], [[Tibetan]] and {{Wiki|Chinese}} sources as well as in {{Wiki|modern}} [[scholarly]] publications, and questioned their authorship. We have examined several of these texts systematically with regard to compositional [[techniques]], the occurrences of explicit and ‘[[silent]]’ quotes as well as parallels and divergences in style and contents. Some of the works attributed to [[Sthiramati]] show obvious parallels and share a great number of [[identical]] passages, whereas others do not seem related at all, provide diverging explanations on similar topics and may even contradict each other. Taking these similarities and divergences into [[consideration]], one may [[wonder]] which conclusions are to be drawn with regard to the authorship of the works attributed to [[Sthiramati]].
+
The first [[teaching]] session (Introduction into [[Sthiramati’s]] Œuvre [lecture]) gave an overview of the seventeen works ascribed to the author [[Sthiramati]] in [[Indian]], [[Tibetan]] and {{Wiki|Chinese}} sources as well as in {{Wiki|modern}} [[scholarly]] publications, and questioned their authorship. We have examined several of these texts systematically with regard to compositional [[techniques]], the occurrences of explicit and ‘[[silent]]’  
 +
 
 +
quotes as well as parallels and divergences in style and contents. Some of the works attributed to [[Sthiramati]] show obvious parallels and share a great number of [[identical]] passages, whereas others do not seem related at all, provide diverging explanations on similar topics and may even contradict each other. Taking these similarities and divergences into [[consideration]], one may [[wonder]] which conclusions are to be drawn with regard to the authorship of the works attributed to [[Sthiramati]].
  
 
In the second session ([[Sthiramati’s]] Commentaries on Early [[Mahāyāna sūtras]] I [seminar]) we have read selected passages from one of [[Sthiramati’s]] commentaries on early [[Mahāyāna sūtras]], namely the *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā, and compared its contents with related passages in [[Sthiramati’s]] Madhyāntavibhāgaṭīkā. The *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā is a commentary (the only [[Indian]] commentary) on the Kāśyapaparivartasūtra, a very famous [[Mahāyāna sūtra]] dealing with the qualities of the [[bodhisattva]] and with important [[Mahāyāna]] [[Wikipedia:concept|concepts]] as for instance ‘[[emptiness]]’ ([[śūnyatā]]), ‘the middle and the extremes’ (madhyānta), etc. The  
 
In the second session ([[Sthiramati’s]] Commentaries on Early [[Mahāyāna sūtras]] I [seminar]) we have read selected passages from one of [[Sthiramati’s]] commentaries on early [[Mahāyāna sūtras]], namely the *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā, and compared its contents with related passages in [[Sthiramati’s]] Madhyāntavibhāgaṭīkā. The *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā is a commentary (the only [[Indian]] commentary) on the Kāśyapaparivartasūtra, a very famous [[Mahāyāna sūtra]] dealing with the qualities of the [[bodhisattva]] and with important [[Mahāyāna]] [[Wikipedia:concept|concepts]] as for instance ‘[[emptiness]]’ ([[śūnyatā]]), ‘the middle and the extremes’ (madhyānta), etc. The  
  
*Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā, which is available only in its [[Tibetan]] and {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations, is attributed to the author [[Sthiramati]] in its [[Tibetan]] colophon. The commentary’s obvious [[Yogācāra]] {{Wiki|perspective}} and its structural similarity with the Viniścayasaṅgrahaṇī may be counted in favour of [[Sthiramati’s]] authorship. However, the fact that comments on the Kāśyapaparivartasūtra which are found in [[Sthiramati’s]] Madhyāntavibhāgaṭīkā differ substantially from parallel explanations in the *[[Kāśyapaparivarta]] [[ṭīkā]] as well as the *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā’s rather [[early translation]] into {{Wiki|Chinese}} (between 508 and 535 by [[Bodhiruci]]) make the scenario of a single [[Sthiramati]] as the common author of both texts appear [[doubtful]].
+
*Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā, which is available only in its [[Tibetan]] and {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations, is attributed to the author [[Sthiramati]] in its [[Tibetan]] colophon. The commentary’s obvious [[Yogācāra]] {{Wiki|perspective}} and its structural similarity with the Viniścayasaṅgrahaṇī may be counted in  
 +
 
 +
favour of [[Sthiramati’s]] authorship. However, the fact that comments on the Kāśyapaparivartasūtra which are found in [[Sthiramati’s]] Madhyāntavibhāgaṭīkā differ substantially from parallel explanations in the *[[Kāśyapaparivarta]] [[ṭīkā]] as well as the *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā’s rather [[early translation]] into {{Wiki|Chinese}} (between 508 and 535 by [[Bodhiruci]]) make the scenario of a single [[Sthiramati]] as the common author of both texts appear [[doubtful]].
  
 
In the third session ([[Sthiramati’s]] Commentaries on Early [[Mahāyāna sūtras]] II [seminar]) selected passages of the [[Tibetan translation]] of the Akṣayamatinirdeśaṭīkā have been studied and compared systematically with parallel passages in [[Sthiramati’s]] commentary on the [[Mahāyānasūtrālaṅkāra]], the *Sūtrālaṅkāravṛttibhāṣya. The main topic of the [[Akṣayamatinirdeśasūtra]] is the eighty ‘imperishabilities’ (akṣaya), that is eighty qualities to be possessed by the [[bodhisattva]].
 
In the third session ([[Sthiramati’s]] Commentaries on Early [[Mahāyāna sūtras]] II [seminar]) selected passages of the [[Tibetan translation]] of the Akṣayamatinirdeśaṭīkā have been studied and compared systematically with parallel passages in [[Sthiramati’s]] commentary on the [[Mahāyānasūtrālaṅkāra]], the *Sūtrālaṅkāravṛttibhāṣya. The main topic of the [[Akṣayamatinirdeśasūtra]] is the eighty ‘imperishabilities’ (akṣaya), that is eighty qualities to be possessed by the [[bodhisattva]].

Revision as of 00:54, 10 June 2020



« The Seventeen Works Attributed to the Indian Buddhist Scholar Sthiramati »

The four sessions focused on the scriptural corpus of Sthiramati, a pivotal scholar in the development of Indian Yogācāra thought in the 6th century. So far Sthiramati’s work has received far less attention from modern scholars than the treatises of other Yogācāra authors like Asaṅga or Vasubandhu—probably because of the perception of Sthiramati as a commentator and not as an original author in his own

right. However, as we have tried to show in a recently published paper, the classification of a text as a “commentary” does not necessarily imply that the text is less original or innovative than a work not belonging to the commentarial genre. Conversely, root texts, as for instance Vasubandhu’s Pañcaskandhaka, are often likewise characterized by the restructuring and summarizing of known doctrines, rather than by the

introduction of completely new concepts. Commentators like Sthiramati have shaped the doctrinal development of the Yogācāra tradition by introducing new concepts and reorganizing previous teachings to a similar extent as ‘independent’ authors like Vasubandhu. Privileging independent texts over commentarial works in academia reflects our own presuppositions and is not justified.

The four teaching sessions were devoted to the examination of the seventeen works ascribed to Sthiramati and of the main doctrines propagated in these texts. While most of the commentaries among the seventeen works are written on works belonging to the Yogācāra tradition, two of them refer to early Mahāyāna sūtras without a specific Yogācāra background, namely the Akṣayamatinirdeśaṭīkā and the *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā. As Indian commentaries on Mahāyāna sūtras are rare in general, the two works represent important sources for the understanding of the development of the Mahāyāna and have been discussed in particular detail in two of the four teaching sessions. The investigation of their contents and style allows to better assess their place within the Yogācāra school and their position in the history of Buddhist thought. Being mostly known for his commentaries, Sthiramati

Annuaire EPHE, Sciences religieuses, t. 125 (2016-2017) Résumés des conférences (2016-2017)

is also supposed (in the Tibetan tradition) to have composed seven Tantric works. It can be stated with some certainty that they have been authored by a different individual than the author of the philosophical commentaries.

The first teaching session (Introduction into Sthiramati’s Œuvre [lecture]) gave an overview of the seventeen works ascribed to the author Sthiramati in Indian, Tibetan and Chinese sources as well as in modern scholarly publications, and questioned their authorship. We have examined several of these texts systematically with regard to compositional techniques, the occurrences of explicit and ‘silent

quotes as well as parallels and divergences in style and contents. Some of the works attributed to Sthiramati show obvious parallels and share a great number of identical passages, whereas others do not seem related at all, provide diverging explanations on similar topics and may even contradict each other. Taking these similarities and divergences into consideration, one may wonder which conclusions are to be drawn with regard to the authorship of the works attributed to Sthiramati.

In the second session (Sthiramati’s Commentaries on Early Mahāyāna sūtras I [seminar]) we have read selected passages from one of Sthiramati’s commentaries on early Mahāyāna sūtras, namely the *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā, and compared its contents with related passages in Sthiramati’s Madhyāntavibhāgaṭīkā. The *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā is a commentary (the only Indian commentary) on the Kāśyapaparivartasūtra, a very famous Mahāyāna sūtra dealing with the qualities of the bodhisattva and with important Mahāyāna concepts as for instance ‘emptiness’ (śūnyatā), ‘the middle and the extremes’ (madhyānta), etc. The

  • Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā, which is available only in its Tibetan and Chinese translations, is attributed to the author Sthiramati in its Tibetan colophon. The commentary’s obvious Yogācāra perspective and its structural similarity with the Viniścayasaṅgrahaṇī may be counted in

favour of Sthiramati’s authorship. However, the fact that comments on the Kāśyapaparivartasūtra which are found in Sthiramati’s Madhyāntavibhāgaṭīkā differ substantially from parallel explanations in the *Kāśyapaparivarta ṭīkā as well as the *Kāśyapaparivartaṭīkā’s rather early translation into Chinese (between 508 and 535 by Bodhiruci) make the scenario of a single Sthiramati as the common author of both texts appear doubtful.

In the third session (Sthiramati’s Commentaries on Early Mahāyāna sūtras II [seminar]) selected passages of the Tibetan translation of the Akṣayamatinirdeśaṭīkā have been studied and compared systematically with parallel passages in Sthiramati’s commentary on the Mahāyānasūtrālaṅkāra, the *Sūtrālaṅkāravṛttibhāṣya. The main topic of the Akṣayamatinirdeśasūtra is the eighty ‘imperishabilities’ (akṣaya), that is eighty qualities to be possessed by the bodhisattva.

The last session (Sthiramati’s Philosophical Views [seminar]) was devoted to the investigation of Sthiramati’s views on the nature of the mind, the constituents of the person and true reality. We have read selected passages from his commentaries on the Triṃśikā, the Pañcaskandhakavibhāṣā (both available in Sanskrit) and the Mahāyānasūtrālaṅkāra (available in Tibetan translation) and focused on concepts such as the “store mind” (ālayavijñāna), the afflicted notion [of “I am”] (kliṣṭamanas) and the three natures (svabhāva).


Source