Wúliángshòu jīng jì 無量壽經記
Notes on the Sūtra of Immeasurable Life by 玄一 (Xuányī, 集)
About the work
A fragmentary one-juǎn commentary on the Cáo-Wèi translation of the Wúliángshòu jīng 無量壽經 (the Larger Sukhāvatī-vyūha; standardly the recension attributed to 康僧鎧 Saṃghavarman KR6p0031), by the Silla 新羅 commentator 玄一 Xuányī (fl. late 7th–early 8th century). The text printed in the Xù-zàng-jīng is incomplete: it preserves only the upper portion of the original (with substantial lacunae marked by □ in the source) and breaks off in the middle of the Buddha’s discourse on Dharmākara’s vows. The colophon ascribes the work to “Shì Xuányī, 集” (compiled), and the commentary follows the standard Sino-Korean Yogācāra exegetical method, drawing extensively on the Yúqié shī-dì lùn 瑜伽師地論 (especially juǎn 38 and 96), the Pútí jīng lùn 菩提經論, and the technical vocabulary of the Faxiang 法相 school.
Abstract
Xuányī’s Jì is one of three substantial Silla-period commentaries on the Wúliángshòu jīng — the others being 元曉 Wŏnhyo’s Wúliángshòu jīng zōngyào 無量壽經宗要 (T1747B) and Kyŏnghŭng’s Wúliángshòu jīng liánjì 無量壽經連義述文贊 (T1748). It is unusual among Silla Pure Land commentaries in proceeding by quotation-and-gloss of the sūtra text rather than by topical division (kē 科) — though kē-division headings remain visible in places. The commentary is preserved largely through Japanese Hossō 法相-school transmission: substantial fragments were carried to Japan by the early eighth century and cited in Japanese Pure Land literature (notably the Mukōzanmaishū 無相三昧集 and the works of Genshin 源信), but no complete Chinese-side copy survived. The Xùzàngjīng recension reconstructs the text from a Dunhuang manuscript fragment plus partial citations; what remains breaks off well before the parable of the burning house, the description of the nine grades of rebirth, or the closing transmission, all of which are missing. The Faxiang-school doctrinal vocabulary — the seven-fold supremacy of bodhi, the doctrine of the indestructibility of karma, the distinction between gradual and sudden realisation — is taken over directly from Wŏnch’ŭk’s commentarial tradition. Dating is by inference: Xuányī cites the Yúqiélùn in 玄奘 Xuánzàng’s translation (post-648) and was himself cited in early-eighth-century Japanese works, so a working bracket of c. 680–750 is defensible.
Translations and research
- Mochizuki Shinkō 望月信亨, Chūgoku jōdo kyōrishi 中國淨土教理史, Kyoto, 1942 / 1964 — discusses the Silla commentaries on the larger sūtra including the Jì.
- Inagaki Hisao, The Three Pure Land Sutras: A Study and Translation, Kyoto: Nagata Bunshōdō, 1995/2003 — surveys the Chinese and Korean exegetical tradition.
- Sungtaek Cho. “The Buddhist Sutra Commentaries of Wŏnhyo and his Korean Contemporaries.” Korean Studies 30 (2006).
Other points of interest
The text is one of the relatively few surviving examples of a Silla Wúliángshòu jīng commentary that is not by Wŏnhyo. Its disappearance in Korea and partial survival via Japanese citation is characteristic of the textual fortunes of seventh- and eighth-century Korean Buddhist scholasticism more generally.