Sìzhǒng xiāngwéi duàn lüèjì 四種相違斷略記
A Brief Summary-Decision on the Four Kinds of Contradiction by 眞興 (Zhēnxīng / Shinkō, 集)
About the work
A one-fascicle decisional summary on the Four Contradictions (四相違) doctrine by 眞興 (Shinkō, 935–1004), serving as a companion to his fuller sījì exposition KR6o0016 Yīnmíng sìzhǒng xiāngwéi luè sījì. Both works are sub-commentaries on the relevant section of KR6o0008 Yīnmíng rù zhèng lǐ lùn shū 因明入正理論疏 (T44n1840) by 窺基 (Kuījī). Preserved in Taishō vol. 69 (no. 2278). The Japanese title is Shi-shu sōi dan-ryaku-ki. The genre-marker 斷 (duàn, “decision-cut”) signals that the work resolves contested points by issuing a final ruling.
Prefaces
The work has no formal authorial preface. It opens directly with the first decisional question: “問。文云。有人解四相違叙古人釋言顯・意許爲ト云ヲ自性・差別云。理恐未然云云此文何人破誰耶 答。璧法師破古師也言古師者。通文軌師慈恩也” — “Question: a passage says, ‘Someone interpreting the Four Contradictions expounds the gǔrén school’s reading of yánxiǎn and yìxǔ as constituting the self-nature and differentia contradictions respectively, but I fear this is not so.’ Whose passage is this, and who is being criticised? Answer: Master Bì 璧法師 is criticising the gǔshī. By ‘gǔshī’ he means generally Master Wénguǐ 文軌 and Cí’ēn 慈恩 (i.e., Kuījī).” The signature reads “眞興集” (“compiled by Shinkō”). The transmitted text includes Japanese kana-style interlinear marks (ト, ヲ, テ) characteristic of late-Heian Hossō scholastic notation.
Abstract
The Duànluè jì is structurally distinct from its companion sījì KR6o0016: where the sījì is broader and pedagogically oriented, the Duànluè takes the form of a series of pointed question-and-decision (問・答) entries, each isolating a contested point in the prior commentarial tradition and issuing Shinkō’s adjudication. The work is consequently invaluable as a documentary witness to the late-tenth-century state of Hossō scholastic debate on the Four Contradictions: by naming the masters whose views are being arbitrated (璧法師, 文軌, 慈恩, etc.), Shinkō provides a roster of late-Heian Hossō inmyō opinion.
The reference to “璧法師” (Master Bì) is to the lost commentary by the Táng monk 道璧 Dàobì, of which only fragments survive elsewhere; Shinkō’s quotations make this work an important secondary source.
Date: undated. Composition window c. 970–1004 (as for KR6o0016).
Translations and research
- Takemura Shōhō 武邑尚邦. Inmyōgaku — sono genri to tenkai 因明學――その原理と展開. Kyoto: Hyakkaen, 1986.
- Iida Yūei 飯田祐英, Hossō-shū inmyō-gaku no kenkyū 法相宗因明學の研究, Kyoto: Hyakkaen, 1975.
Other points of interest
The Duànluè jì is the principal witness for the yīnmíng exegesis of 道璧 Dàobì, whose own commentary on the Rù lùn is otherwise lost. Shinkō’s quotations, though brief, are unusually circumstantial — they identify the specific yánxiǎn / yìxǔ distinction at issue, name the targets of criticism, and supply contextual location-cues. The work thus joins Zenju’s Myōtō shō KR6o0009 and Zōshun’s Daishō shō KR6o0010 as a tertiary source for the reconstruction of lost early-Táng yīnmíng commentary.