聞分館君 Ask BunKanKun

法華玄論

5 min read

Text ID
KR6d0023
Date
597–623
Dynasty
隋

Fǎhuá xuánlùn 法華玄論

Discourses on the Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sūtra by 吉藏 (Jízàng / Jiāxiáng dàshī, 撰)

About the work

A ten-juan doctrinal exposition of the Lotus Sūtra by Jízàng 吉藏 (549–623), the principal Suí systematiser of the Sānlùn 三論 (Madhyamaka) school and the most important non-Tiāntái commentator on the Lotus Sūtra in early-medieval Chinese Buddhism. Composed at the Jiāxiángsì 嘉祥寺 in Kuàijī 會稽 or at the Yángzhōu Huìrìdàochǎng 慧日道場 (whence Jízàng’s principal honorific Jiāxiáng dàshī 嘉祥大師), the work is one of the principal monuments of pre-Tiāntái Chinese Mahāyāna systematic theology and provides the principal alternative interpretation of the Lotus Sūtra to Zhìyǐ’s contemporaneous Tiāntái synthesis.

Prefaces

The text in the Taishō recension (T34n1720) carries no separate preface; it opens directly with Jízàng’s xuányì (profound meaning) framing: “The profound meaning has six layers: 1, the methods of propagating the sūtra; 2, its general intent; 3, explaining the title; 4, establishing its purport; 5, resolving difficulties; 6, explaining following the text.” The body proper signed Hú Jízàng zhuàn 胡吉藏撰 (“composed by Jízàng of Hú [Sogdian/Western Region] origin”) — a reference to Jízàng’s Sogdian / Parthian descent.

Abstract

The Xuánlùn applies Jízàng’s distinctive Sānlùn hermeneutic — the èrzàng 二藏 (twofold canon: śrāvakapiṭaka 聲聞藏 and bodhisattvapiṭaka 菩薩藏) classification, the èrdì 二諦 (two-truths) doctrine drawn from Bhāvaviveka and Nāgārjuna, and the bābù zhōngdào 八不中道 (eight-fold negation middle-way) of Mūlamadhyamakakārikā 1.1 — to the Lotus Sūtra. Where Zhìyǐ’s contemporaneous Xuányì (KR6d0006, T1716) develops the Lotus through the Tiāntái wǔzhòng xuányì 五重玄義 schema and the yuánrì jiào 圓融教 (“perfectly-fused teaching”) apparatus, Jízàng’s Xuánlùn reads the Lotus through a strict Madhyamaka two-truths framework: the upāya (provisional) and the nirupadeśa (real) of the Lotus’s kāiquán xiǎnshí 開權顯實 (“opening the provisional to disclose the real”) become the bǐyú 俗 (“worldly truth”) and zhēndì 真諦 (“ultimate truth”) of Madhyamaka.

The work is one of three major Jízàng productions on the Lotus Sūtra preserved in the Taishō: the Fǎhuá xuánlùn (T1720), the longer Fǎhuá yìshū (KR6d0024, T1721, 12 juan), and the brief Fǎhuá yóuyì (KR6d0025, T1722, 1 juan). Together these constitute Jízàng’s three-part Lotus Sūtra apparatus: the Xuánlùn providing the systematic doctrinal exposition, the Yìshū providing the line-by-line commentary, and the Yóuyì providing a brief introductory survey. The composition of the three is generally placed in Jízàng’s mature productive period at the Huìrìdàochǎng (after 597) through his death in 623.

Jízàng’s Lotus Sūtra interpretation became the standard alternative to Tiāntái in pre-modern Chinese Buddhism, and his works were carried to Korea (where they became the foundation of the Korean Sānlùn / Samnon 三論 school) and to Japan (where they became the foundation of the Japanese Sanron 三論 school of Nara Buddhism, transmitted through Hye-gwan 慧灌 in 625).

Translations and research

  • Hirai Shun’ei 平井俊榮. Chūgoku Hannya shisōshi kenkyū: Kichizō to Sanron gakuha 中国般若思想史研究：吉藏と三論学派. Tokyo: Shunjūsha, 1976. (The standard monographic study of Jí-zàng and the Sānlùn school.)
  • Hirai Shun’ei 平井俊榮. Hokke monku no seiritsu ni kansuru kenkyū 法華文句の成立に関する研究. Tokyo: Shunjūsha, 1985.
  • Robinson, Richard H. Early Mādhyamika in India and China. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1967. (Classic treatment of the early Sānlùn tradition.)
  • Cheng, Hsueh-li. Empty Logic: Mādhyamika Buddhism from Chinese Sources. New York: Philosophical Library, 1984.
  • Liebenthal, Walter. Chao Lun, the Treatises of Seng-Chao. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1968. (For the pre-Jí-zàng Sānlùn tradition.)
  • Kanno Hiroshi 菅野博史. Hokke gisho no kenkyū 法華義疏の研究. Tokyo: Daitō Shuppansha, 1996. (Treats Jí-zàng’s Lotus commentary in the wider context of pre-Tiāntái Lotus exegesis.)
  • Hurvitz, Leon. Chih-i (538–597): An Introduction to the Life and Ideas of a Chinese Buddhist Monk. Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques 12. Brussels: Institut Belge des Hautes Études Chinoises, 1962. (For the comparative reading of Jí-zàng’s and Zhìyǐ’s Lotus interpretations.)
  • Koseki, Aaron K. “Chi-tsang’s Sheng-man pao-k’u: The True Dharma Doctrine and the Bodhisattva Ideal.” Philosophy East and West 34.1 (1984): 67–83.

Other points of interest

The exact relationship between Jízàng’s three Lotus Sūtra works (Xuánlùn, Yìshū, Yóuyì) is a longstanding problem in Chinese Buddhist textual scholarship. Hirai Shun’ei (1976, 1985) argues that the three were composed in distinct phases of Jízàng’s career, with the Yìshū representing his most mature treatment and the Xuánlùn and Yóuyì belonging to earlier phases. The textual evidence is not entirely conclusive; the dating must remain bracketed in the productive period c. 597–623.

Graph View

Backlinks