Dà shèng qǐ xìn lùn 大乘起信論
Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith (Tang re-translation) by 馬鳴菩薩 (Mǎmíng púsà / Aśvaghoṣa, 造 — but see Abstract) and 實叉難陀 (Shíchā-nántuó / Śikṣānanda, 譯)
About the work
A two-juǎn Tang-period “new translation” (xīn-yì 新譯) of the Awakening of Faith, traditionally attributed to 馬鳴菩薩 (Aśvaghoṣa) and rendered into Chinese by 實叉難陀 (Śikṣānanda, 652–710), the great Khotanese-Chinese translator of the Avataṃsaka-sūtra. The Taishō places this work in parallel with the Liáng-Paramārtha version KR6o0078, with the editorial cross-reference “No. 1667 [No. 1666]“. The opening preface — Xīn-yì Dà chéng qǐ-xìn lùn xù 新譯大乘起信論序 — explicitly presents the work as a re-translation from a fresh Sanskrit manuscript, intended to correct or supplement the Liáng-period rendering.
The provenance question is here at its sharpest. If the Awakening of Faith is a Chinese original (the modern scholarly consensus), then Śikṣānanda’s “re-translation” must be a Tang-period editorial revision of the existing Chinese text presented as a fresh translation — a remarkable claim. If, alternatively, an Indic original existed, the Tang version preserves an independent textual witness. Modern textual analysis (Lai 1980, Whalen Lai’s analysis of differential vocabulary; Grosnick 1989) has shown the two Chinese versions to be doctrinally and stylistically very close, and most scholars now incline to the view that Śikṣānanda’s work is an editorial revision of the existing Liáng version with possibly some marginal Sanskrit-or-secondary input.
Structural Division
CANWWW (T32N1667) follows the same five-section schema as KR6o0078:
- Yīnyuán fēn 因緣分 — Conditions
- Lìyì fēn 立義分 — Establishment of thesis
- Jiěshì fēn 解釋分 — Detailed explanation
- Xiūxíng xìnxīn fēn 修行信心分 — Cultivation of faith
- Quànxiū lìyì fēn 勸修利益分 — Encouragement and benefits
Abstract
The Taishō text opens with the Xīn-yì Dà chéng qǐ-xìn lùn xù 新譯大乘起信論序, an unsigned preface that gives a hagiographic account of Aśvaghoṣa’s career (“five hundred years after the Buddha’s parinirvāṇa”) and praises the Qǐ-xìn lùn as “the secret canon of the Mahāyāna” expressed in compact form. The translation is fixed by the Kāiyuán-lù 開元錄 (T2154) to the Cháng-shòu / Tiān-cè 長壽 / 天冊 / 天授 reign period (probably between 700 and 704) at Cháng’ān or Luòyáng, during Śikṣānanda’s residency at Wǔ Zé-tiān’s 武則天 court. Comparison with the Liáng version KR6o0078 shows that the two are closely related but the Tang version uses a slightly more refined doctrinal vocabulary and is more polished stylistically; the differences in some technical terms (especially around niàn 念 / citta and shēng-miè 生滅 / nirodha) have been the subject of substantial modern scholarship (Lai 1980).
The Tang version was historically less influential than the Liáng version: most Sui-Tang and Song commentaries (notably 法藏’s [[KR6o0105|Yìjì 義記]], 元曉’s [[KR6o0101|Shū 疏]]) take Paramārtha’s text as their base, citing the Tang version only occasionally. This has reinforced the modern view that the Liáng version was the textually dominant form throughout East Asian transmission history.
Translations and research
- Hakeda, Yoshito S. The Awakening of Faith Attributed to Aśvaghosha. New York: Columbia University Press, 1967. — Standard English translation; treats both Chinese versions.
- Liebenthal, Walter. “Notes on the Vajrasamādhi.” T’oung Pao 44 (1956). — Treats the related apocryphal sūtra question.
- Lai, Whalen. “A Clue to the Authorship of the Awakening of Faith: Siksānanda’s Redaction of the Word Nien.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 3 (1980): 34–53. — Foundational study of the differences between Liáng and Tang versions.
- Grosnick, William H. “The Categories of T’i, Hsiang, and Yung: Evidence That Paramārtha Composed the Awakening of Faith.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 12 (1989): 65–92.
Other points of interest
The Tang version is the principal text for some Korean and Japanese commentaries (especially within the late Hossō tradition) but is markedly secondary in Chinese exegesis to the Liáng version. The very existence of a Tang “re-translation” is one of the most-cited pieces of textual evidence in the long debate over the authenticity of the Awakening of Faith: an Indic-original-then-translated text rarely needs to be retranslated within a century, suggesting Śikṣānanda’s work was at least in part editorial or polemical.
Links
- CBETA
- Dazangthings date evidence (695): [ T ] T = CBETA [Chinese Buddhist Electronic Text Association]. Taishō shinshū daizōkyō 大正新脩大藏經. Edited by Takakusu Junjirō 高楠順次郎 and Watanabe Kaigyoku 渡邊海旭. Tokyo: Taishō shinshū daizōkyō kankōkai/Daizō shuppan, 1924-1932. CBReader v 5.0, 2014. https://dazangthings.nz/cbc/source/1/