The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey Florin Deleanu 1. Preliminary Remarks This bibliographical survey is far from complete or satisfactory. It began as a basic whatis-what list of primary and secondary sources meant to assist me in the process of rendering into English Śikṣānanda’s Chinese translation of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra (to be published in the Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai English Tripiṭaka). Over the years, this grew into a larger file which has been used as a reference material for my seminars on the sutra. Encouraged by the positive reactions coming from my students (bet they just wanted higher grades…) as well as the editorial policy set by Professor Akira Saito allowing for research notes to be included in the newly launched Bulletin of the International Institute for Buddhist Studies, I have decided to revise and update my list. After all, without any comprehensive bibliographical surveys, even an incomplete overview like this might serve, dare I hope, as an aid to further studies on the Laṅkāvatārasūtra. Before embarking on my biblio-journey, I must spell out its scope and methodology. (1) The survey arranges the primary and the secondary sources chronologically rather than alphabetically. Obviously, this not a bibliographical list attached to a study but a stand-alone contribution conceived primarily as a history of the modern research, translation, and edition of the sutra. (2) I have not included a section on the Sanskrit manuscripts or, for that matter, on any manuscript testimony in the Tibetan, Chinese, and Japanese traditions.1 Some basic data is found in footnotes 2, 4, 5, and 27 below, but this hardly does justice to the vast and complicated picture of manuscript witnesses surviving today.2 Unfortunately, a proper The only exception is the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra: Sanskrit Manuscript from Nepal reproduced by Lokesh Chandra (see 2.1.4. below) which was published as a facsimile edition. 2 The manuscripts used by Nanjio for his Sanskrit editio princeps are listed in the ‘Preliminary Notes’ of Nanjio [1923] 1956 (see 2.1.2. and note 4 below). For a far more detailed and updated presentation of the manuscripts, see Takasaki 1981, pp. (1)-(4) [in Japanese], 1-3 [in English] (see 2.1.5. and note 5 below). A list of manuscripts and other primary sources is also given in Hadano 1993, ‘Abbreviations’ (see 2.4. and note 27 below). A recent survey of the manuscripts as well as other primary sources is found in Okumura 2014, 63-72 (see section 7.2. below). Schmithausen 2006, Horiuchi 2013, and Horiuchi 2015 (see 7.2. below) convincingly show how the use of the Sanskrit manuscripts available nowadays, alongside the Tibetan and Chinese translations, can contribute to improving the existing editions. For recent identifications, see the Khadaliq fragments listed in Wille 2014, 226 (see 7.2. below.). See also Manuscripts Or. 1932-1935 in the Cambridge Digital Library (http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/collections/sanskrit/1). 1 15 Florin Deleanu codicological overview of this substantial body could not be undertaken here. (3) There is an impressive corpus of traditional commentaries dedicated to the Laṅkāvatārasūtra, especially in East Asian Buddhism. For reasons of time and lack of familiarity with this literature, I had to limit Section 3 below to a minimum overview. Fortunately, there are more extensive surveys carried by Japanese scholars which are reasonably easy to access (for more details, see 3.2. below). (4) The Laṅkāvatārasūtra has had a major impact on the history of Buddhism from India and Tibet to China and Japan. The topic is explored or touched upon in numerous secondary sources and it doubtless deserves a survey in its own right. Unfortunately, here I could only include just a handful of such contributions, mainly related to Chan/Zen Buddhism (see end of section 7.1. below). (5) The bibliography generally follows the Humanities style recommended by the th 16 edition of the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010), with two slight alterations. (A) Given the non-alphabetical order of citation, I have not inverted the name-surname sequence of the (first) author in the Western languages publications. (B) Throughout the paper, I have used British English punctuation, which made some slight stylistic modifications necessary. I have, however, made an exception in my notes whenever I refer to a study listed in sections 7.1. and 7.2., which are dedicated to the secondary literature. In such cases, I follow the author-date style. The chronological nature of this bibliographical survey will make it easy to locate the studies in the respective sections. (6) Occasionally, I have inserted brief comments or clarifications between square brackets. Ideally, a bibliographical survey should contain short (better, detailed!) reviews for each entry, but lack of time has made it impossible. I hope this and many other shortcomings could be addressed in future updates or more comprehensive surveys undertaken by other students in the field. Last but not least, I should like to express my sincerest gratitude to Prof. em. Dr Lambert Schmithausen (University of Hamburg), Prof. Dr Akira Saitō (International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies, Tokyo), and Mr Shin’ichirō Hori (International Institute for Buddhist Studies, Tokyo) for their kind suggestions and continued support. 2. Primary Textual Witnesses 2.1. Sanskrit Editions 2.1.1. S.C. Das and S.C. Acharya Vidyābhūṣaṇa ed. Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra. Darjeeling: 1900.3 It is also worth mentioning here that the beginning and the end of a Nepalese manuscript are transcribed in R. Mitra, The Sanskrit Buddhist Literature of Nepal. Calcutta: The Asiatic Society 3 16 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey [Partial edition of the text corresponding to Bunjio edition (see 2.1.2. below) page 1 to page 144, line 5.] 2.1.2. Bunyiu Nanjio ed. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra. Kyoto: Otani University Press, 1923; 2nd edition, 1956.4 [The editio princeps of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra in its entirety. In spite of its imperfections, it remains the most reliable edition for reading and studying the Sanskrit original.] 2.1.3. P.L. Vaidya ed. Saddharmalaṅkāvatārasūtram. Darbhanga: Mithila Institute, 1963. [Basically, a devanāgarī reprint of Nanjio’s edition, with occasional corrections of typos.] 2.1.4. Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra: Sanskrit Manuscript from Nepal, reproduced by Lokesh Chandra, from the collection of Prof. Raghuvira (Śata-piṭaka Series). New Delhi: Sharada Rani, 1977. 2.1.5. (A) Jikido Takasaki ed. A Revised Edition of the Laṅkāvatāra-Sūtra, KṣaṇikaParivarta. Tokyo: Ippan kenkyū (C) Kenkyū seika hōkokusho 一般研究（C） 研究成果報告書, 1981. The edition is also included in: (B) Jikido Takasaki. Collected Papers on the Tathāgatagarbha Doctrine. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 2014. [Excellent critical edition of the chapter. It makes use of 17 Sanskrit manuscripts, Nanjio’s and Vaidya’s editions, Tibetan translation, and all the three Chinese translations (for which see 2.1.2. and 2.1.3. respectively.]5 of Bengal, 1882 (pp. 110-112). 4 The edition makes use of 6 Sanskrit witnesses, i.e. 4 MSS: A (Royal Asiatic Society), C (Cambridge Univ.), K (Kawaguchi), and T (Takakusu), and two previous partial editions: Das and Vidyābhūṣaṇa eds. (see 2.1.1.) and Mitra 1882 (see note 2 above) as well as the Tibetan rendering and the three Chinese translations (see below 2.2. and 2.3. respectively). (NB: K manuscript is recorded in Seiren Matsunami, A Catalogue of Sanskrit Manuscripts in the Tokyo University Library (Tokyo: Suzuki Research Foundation, 1965) as Ms No. 331 while T manuscript is Ms No. 333.) 5 Takasaki’s introduction to the edition (p. 2) also contains important insights concerning the stemmatic relations between the manuscripts. He argues that the extant Sanskrit version reflects a single textual recension, which is identified as ‘Nepalese’, which can be further divided into four lineages: (A) T1 (‘T’=#333) - T 6 (#332) - N 11 (B) C 8 (‘C’) - R 10 (‘A’) – N 12 (C) T2 (‘K’ =#331)…T4…N13 (D) T3 - T5 - C9 - N14 - N16 – N17 17 Florin Deleanu 2.1.6. Yadunātha Prasād Dubey ed. and tr. The Saddharma Laṅkāvatārasūtra: vaipulya sutra. Varanasi: Bauddha Bharati, 2006. [It basically reproduces Vaidya ed. (itself is a faithful reflection of Nanjio’s ed.), accompanied by a translation into Nepalese.] 2.1.7. Tokiwa Gishin. Laṅkāvatāra-Ratna-Sūtram Sarva-Buddha-Pravacana-Hṛdayam – A Sanskrit Restoration – A Study of the Four-Fascicle Laṅkāvatāra Ratna Sūtram. Osaka: Private publication, 2003. [A tentative Sanskrit reconstruction on the basis of Guṇabhadra’s Chinese translation (see 2.3.2. below), which Gishin regards as the original version of the text. Although an interesting exercise in linguistic proficiency – mainly useful for scholars not familiar with Classical Chinese – it can hardly be regarded as an authentic Sanskrit testimony.] 2.1.8. Bhikṣuṇī Vinītā ed. and tr. A Unique Collection of Twenty Sūtras in a Sanskrit Manuscript from the Potala, Volume I, 1-10. Beijing and Vienna: China Tibetology Publishing House & Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, 2010. [It contains the edition of a small fragment from Chapter VIII.] 2.1.9. Okumura Motoyasu 奥村元康. ‘Ryōga kyō no bunkengakuteki kenkyū: “Rabana ō kanjō hon” bon-zō-kan kōtei tekisuto (Sono 1)’ 『楞伽経』の文献学的研 究」― 「羅婆那王勧請品」梵蔵漢校訂テキスト（その１）―. Sengokuyama bukkyōgaku ronshū 仙石山佛教學論集 7 (2014): 53-151. [The contribution contains critical editions of the Sanskrit original as well as of the Tibetan translation and Bodhiruci’s and Śikśānanda’s Chinese translations, both accompanied by Classical Japanese kundoku-style renderings, of the first part of Chapter I.]6 2.2. Tibetan Translations 2.2.1. ʼPhags pa lang-kar gshegs paʼi theg pa chen poʼi mdo (Skt. *Āryalaṅkāvatāramahāyānasūtra) (i) bKaʼ ʼgyur (Peking edition), mDo sna tshogs No. 775 (Ngu 60b7-208b2; Otani facsimile ed. vol. 29, pp. 26-85). [The Otani Catalogue 大谷勘同目録 contains no reference to the translator’s name.] (ii) bKaʼ ʼgyur (sDe dge edition), mDo-sde No. 107 (Ca 56a1-191b7) Translated by ʼGos chos grub 法成.7 (T=Tokyo University Library; N=Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project; C=Cambridge University Library; R=Royal Asiatic Society) 6 The contribution also contains a detailed introductory study of the primary sources and the historical background of the text (for which reason, I have also listed it in section 7.2. below). 7 The sNar thang Canon also regards it as a translation from the Chinese (Takasaki 2009, 360, 18 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey (iii) bKaʼ ʼgyur (Zhonghua edition), mDo-sde No. 0125, vol. 49, pp. 141-5068 2.2.2. ʼPhags pa lang-kar gshegs paʼi rin po cheʼi mdo las sangs rgyas thmas cad kyi gsung gi sning po zhes bya baʼi leʼu （聖入楞伽寶經中一切佛語心品） (i) bKaʼ ʼgyur (Peking edition), mDo sna tshogs No. 776 (Ngu 208b3-313a8; Otani facsimile ed. vol. 29, pp. 85-127). Translated by Chos grub from the Chinese.9 (ii) bKaʼ ʼgyur (sDe dge edition), mDo-sde No. 108 (Ca 192a1-284b7) Translated by ʼGos Chos grub. (iii) bKaʼ ʼgyur (Zhonghua edition), mDo-sde No. 0125, vol. 49, pp. 507-747. * The existence of two Tibetan translations is attested in the early scriptural catalogues. The lDan-dkar-ma (or lHan-dkar-ma) catalogue, compiled sometime between 812 and 824, contains the following entries: [# 84] lang kar gshegs pa | 3300 ślokas | 11 bam po (Lalou ed., p. 321).10 [# 252] lang kar gshegs pa rin po cheʼi leʼu | 2400 ślokas | 8 bam po (id. p. 325) The same situation appears in Bu-ston Chos ʼbyung catalogue, compiled in or around 1322, records the same situation: [# 190] Lang kar gshegs pa; rgya gar las bsgyur ba; 11 bam po (Nishioka ed., p. 71)11 [# 191] Lang-kar gshegs paʼi rin po cheʼi mdo las sangs rgyas thams cad kyi gsung gi sning po zhes bya baʼi leʼu; ʼGos Chos grub kyi rgya las bsgyur ba; for which see section 7.1. below). On Chos grub (ca 750-850), see Ueyama Daishun 上山大峻, Tonkō bukkyō no kenkyū 敦煌 佛教の研究. Kyoto: Hōzō-kan, 1990, and Hadano et al. 1993, VIII=XI (see 2.4. below). 8 ‘Zhonghua edition’ refers to the Tripiṭaka Collation Bureau of China Tibetology Centre 中国 藏学研究中心《大藏经》对勘局 ed., Zhonghua dazangjing ganzhuer (duikanben) (Zangwen). 中华大藏经 甘珠尔 (对勘本) (藏文) (Beijing: Zhongguo zangxue chubanshe, 2008). The Zhonghua edition takes the sDe dge Canon 徳格版 as its basic source (though the number assigned to the texts is different from the Otani Catalogue) and provides endnotes which collate readings from the Yongle 永樂, Lithang 理塘, Peking 北京, Cone 卓尼, sNar thang 那塘, and Lhasa 拉薩 woodblock editions of the Canon as well as the London 倫敦 manuscript. The colophon is translated into Japanese in the Otani Catalogue and in Takasaki 2009, 360 (see section 7.1. below). 10 Marcelle Lalou, ‘Les textes bouddhiques au temps du Roi Khri-sroṅ-lde-bcan’, Journal Asiatique CCXLI (1953): 313-353. On the discrepancy in the bam po number, see below. 9 Nishioka Soshū 西岡祖秀, edited and compiled. ‘Putun Bukkyōshi mokuroku-bu sakuin I’ 『プトウン仏教史』目録部索引 I . Tōkyō daigaku bungakubu, Bunka kōryū kenkyū shisetsu kenkyū kiyō 東京大学文学部 文化交流研究施設研究紀要 4 (1980): 61-92. 11 19 Florin Deleanu 8 bam po (id.) As pointed out by Takasaki Jikidō,12 the sDe dge and sNar thang identification of the ʼPhags pa lang-kar gshegs paʼi theg pa chen poʼi mdo (D # 107) as a translation from the Chinese is wrong. This version closely corresponds to the extant Sanskrit text, which basically reflects a ‘Nepalese recension’. 13 Furthermore, its language follows the vocabulary and style prescribed by the Mahāvyutpatti. One must add, however, that the ʼPhags pa lang-kar gshegs paʼi rin po cheʼi mdo las sangs rgyas thmas cad kyi gsung gi sning po shes bya baʼi leʼu (D #108), which is indeed a rendering from Guṇabhadra’s Chinese translation, has a style and vocabulary similar to D #107. This is most likely due to the fact that D #107 preceded D #108 in time and Chos grub consulted D #107 for his version.14 Another puzzling detail in the history of the Tibetan translation is the discrepancy in the number of textual units known as bam po or ‘bundles’. The bam po numbers registered in the traditional catalogues are different from those attested in the extant texts. The lDan-dkar-ma and Bu ston’s Catalogue record 11 bam pos while the Dunhuang manuscripts and the sDe dge text have 9 bam pos (see Hadano et al. [2.4, below], pp. VII; X-XI). The difference may be explained as the result of a flexible editorial policy which did not set a fix number of folios to be counted as one bam po. A similar practice is also seen in China where different ways of dividing a text into scrolls, the so-called fen juan 分巻, are attested. The different bam po numbers might thus reflect editorial decisions rather different recensions. 2.3. Chinese Translations The Laṅkāvatārasūtra was translated three times into Chinese, with all the three versions surviving today (for a false identification, see 2.3.1. below). The translations are not only important for the history of Chinese Buddhism but they also reflect different stages or renditions in the textual development of the Indic original.15 Takasaki 2009, 359-361 (see 7.1. below). On the ‘Nepalese recension’, see note 5 above. 14 The wrong attribution of the first version, i.e. D #107, to Chos grub is also pointed out in Hadano et al. 1993, VII, X-XI (see 2.4. below). 15 All three translations were collated paragraph-by-paragraph by the Ming scholar-monk Yuanke 員珂 and completed on 12th January 1581 (on the precise date as well as further details of the historical backbground, see Friedrich Grohmann 高明道, ‘Cong “huiyi” tanqi “heben”’ 從《會 譯》談起《会本》, posted on the Digital Library and Museum of Buddhist Studies site: http://enlight.lib.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-BJ013/bj013566668.pdf). The collated edition, 12 13 entitled Lengqieabaduola bao jing heyi 楞伽阿跋多羅寶經會譯 (clearly showing that it takes Guṇabhadra’s version as the basic text 底本) is found in the Wan zhengzangjing 卍正藏經, Volume I, pp. 445a-6680b. Taibei: Xin wenfeng chuban gongsi, 1980 (also accessible online in 20 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey 2.3.1. Dharmakṣema 曇無讖 (385-433), Lengqie jing 楞伽經, in four scrolls 四巻. [Said to have been translated in 414. The translation is not extant and is widely regarded as a false attribution. The attribution and date are found in the Lidai sanbao ji 歴代三寶紀 (T 49.84b7), an ‘infamous’ work of Buddhist historiography compiled by Fei Zhangbo 費長房 in 597. Fei had had to endure the humility of a forced return to secular life during the Buddhist persecution under Emperor Wu 武帝 of the Northern Zhou 北周 Dynasty, persecution which attained its peak between 574 and 578. Animated by overzealous feelings to prove the superiority and vastness of the Buddhist teachings over Taoism, Fei conflated the data making hundreds of false attributions.] 2.3.2. Guṇabhadra 求那跋陀羅 (394-468),16 Lengqieabaduola bao jing 楞伽阿跋多 羅寶經, in four scrolls 四巻. [Translated in 443, also known as the ‘translation of the [Liu] Song Dynasty’ 宋 譯. Main canonical editions: Taishō No. 670; T 16. 480a-514b; Zhonghua17 No. 168, vol. 17, pp. 560-621. Guṇabhadra’s version does not contain Chapters I, IX, and X of the extant Sanskrit original (chapters also found in the Tibetan rendering as well as the other two Chinese translations). Most likely, Guṇabhadra’s version reflects an early version of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra, and the text continued to expand over the next century or so. According to the Biographies of Eminent Monks 高僧傳, the translation was undertaken at a time when Guṇabhadra had little, or no, knowledge of Chinese. This is hardly unusual in Chinese Buddhist history where many of the so-called ‘translators’ from India or Central Asia had very limited knowledge of the language they were supposed to render into. Their main task was to recite or read out a manuscript of the text and explain its difficult parts to one or more Chinese interpreters who were assisting (‘receiving with their brushes’ 筆受) and editing the translation. Seen from our age, these ‘assistants’ would rather deserve the name of translators, or at least editors, but the mediaeval Chinese system of judgement and sensibilities were governed by other paradigms. What makes Guṇabhadra special, however, is that he actually came to regret his lack of linguistic skills. the CBETA database). His name is translated into Chinese as 功 徳 賢 . For Guṇabhadra’s biography, see the Biographies of Eminent Monks 高僧傳 (T 50.344a-445a). (For details concerning the way he translated the Laṅkāvtārasūtra, see below.) 16 ‘Zhonghua’ stands here for the Zhonghua Canon Editing Bureau 《中華大藏經》編輯局 ed., Zhonghua dazangjing (Henwen bufen) 中華大藏經 （漢文部分）. 106 vols. 1984-1996. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju chuban. 17 21 Florin Deleanu The Biographies of Eminent Monks tell us that ‘Later, [Guṇabhadra] translated the Śrīmālā[sūtra] and the Laṅkāvatārasūtra in the Danyang Prefecture 丹陽郡,18 with a group of more than seven hundred disciples, Baoyun 寶雲19 conveying the translation and Huiguan 慧觀20 being in charge of writing [the polished Chinese text] and frequently asking [the Indian Master] until they could obtain a superb grasping the basic meaning. [But] later Guṇabhadra reflected on the fact he had not yet gained command of the language of the Song 宋 [Dynasty] [i.e. Chinese] and harboured feelings of shame and sadness.’ (後於丹陽郡，譯出《勝 鬘》 、《楞伽經》, 徒衆七百餘人，寶雲傳譯，慧觀執筆，往復諮析，妙得本旨。後 〔…〕跋陀自忖 未善宋言 有懷愧歎。T 50.344b3-9). 2.3.3. Bodhiruci 菩提流支 (d. 527),21 Ru Lengqie jing 入楞伽經, in ten scrolls 十巻. [Translated in 514; also known as the ‘translation of the Wei Dynasty’ 魏譯. Main canonical editions: Taishō No. 671; T 16.514c-586b; Zhonghua No. 169, vol. 17, pp. 622-732. Bodhiruci’s translation not only contains all the chapters of the extant Sanskrit version but also shows signs of augmentation (and actually renames some of the chapters). It is hard to determine whether (a) the passages unattested in the other versions reflect a temporary ‘inflation’ in the history of the text, later deleted and edited into the text we know from the extant Sanskrit, the Tibetan translation, and Śikṣānanda’s Chinese translation, or (b) the Bodhiruci version is a separate redaction which circulated within a certain area for a limited period of time and was later discarded, or (c) the passages in question represent Bodhiruci’s own explanatory additions in the process of translation, also showing signs of ‘creative zeal’.] 2.3.4. Śikṣānanda 實叉難陀 (652-710),22 Dasheng ru Lengqie jing 大乘入楞伽經, in seven scrolls 七巻. This refers to a prefecture established during the Jin 晋 Dynasty and located in the southern part of modern-day Jiangning County 江寧縣, Jiangsu Province 江蘇省. 19 Chinese scholar-monk known for his translation activities (375[?]-449). 20 Celebrated scholar-monk who flourished in the first half of the 5th century. 18 His name is also transcribed as 菩提留支, and translated into Chinse as 道希. For his biography, see the Sequel to Biographies of Eminent Monks 續高僧傳 (T 50.428a-b). No historical details about his rendering of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra are mentioned. 21 His name is also transcribed as 乞叉難陀, and translated into Chinese as 學喜. For his biography, see the Biographies of Eminent Monks [compiled under the] Song Dynasty 宋高僧傳 (T 50.718c-719a). It mentions (T 50.718c29-719a1) that he rendered the Laṅkāvatārasūtra, and 22 Empress Wu Zetian 則天武后 wrote a Preface to the translation (for a study on the Preface, see Ishii 2002 in section 7.2. below). 22 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey [Translated between 700-704; also known as the ‘translation of the Tang Dynasty’ 唐譯. Main canonical editions: Taishō No. 672; T 16. 587a-640c; Zhonghua No. 170, vol. 17, pp. 733-809. This is the closest Chinese version to the extant Sanskrit text (as well as the Tibetan translation).] 2.3.4. The stylistic differences between the three Chinese translations are sketched out, albeit with a dose of biased judgement, in the Arcane Meaning of the Essence of the Laṅkāvatāra 入楞伽心玄義, one of the best known commentaries authored by Fazang 法藏, the third patriarch of the Huayan/Kegon 華嚴 school.23 I say ‘biased’ because Fazang was a member of the Chinese team which assisted Śikṣānanda’s efforts to render the sutra. Nonetheless, his views have attained something close to an iconic status when discussing the matter. Here is his verdict: ‘The wording of the translation in four scrolls [by Guṇabhadra] is incomplete, the language follows the Western [i.e. Indic] pronunciation [to such a degree] that it leaves no way [even] for distinguished, intelligent [readers] to understand it and makes fools and common folk overstretch their conjectures and construe it in an erroneous manner. Although the translation in ten scrolls [by Bodhiruci] is slightly more complete in its wording and chapters, the holy purport [of the scripture] makes itself clear with difficulty and its adding words and muddling the wording beclouds the meaning or [simply] leads to mistakes. Eventually, the clear and correct truth [of the sutra] becomes stuck in a [confusing] language. The Sacred Empress [Wu Zetian 則天武后] deplored this incomprehensibility and ordered a new translation. Now, [for the translation undertaken by Master Śikṣānanda,] we have carefully checked24 five Sanskrit manuscripts and compared the two [previous] Chinese translations. We have adopted the good points and corrected the shortcomings. Building [upon all these] outstanding achievements, [this translation] surely [succeeds in] fully conveying the meaning. We [therefore] hope that those studying [the sutra] will fortunately be free from any errors.’25 其四卷迴文不盡, 語順西音，致令髦彦英哲措解無由, 愚類庸夫強推邪 解。其十卷雖文品少具, 聖意難顯，加字混文者泥於意，或致有錯，遂使 明明正理 滯以方言。聖上慨此難通，復令更譯。今則詳五梵本，勘二漢 For a well-weighed judgement of the merits of the three translations, see Horiuchi 2015. See also the chapter on ‘Problems in [Guṇabhadra’s] Translation of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra in Four 23 Scrolls’『四巻楞伽』の訳文の問題 in Taksaki 2009, 357-372 (see Section 7.1. below). 24 A more literal translation of 詳 would be ‘clarify in detail’. 25 Literally, ‘beseech/hope the students [of the text] will fortunately have no error’. 23 Florin Deleanu 文，取其所得，正其所失。累載優業，當盡其旨。庶令學者 幸無訛謬。 (T 39.430b24-c1)26 2.4. Partially Collated Edition of Sanskrit, Tibetan, Chinese cum Jñānaśrībhadra’s Commentary Hadano Hakuyū 羽田野伯猷, with Isoda Hirofumi 磯田煕文, Mitsuhara Keinosuke 密波羅圭之助, and Kōichi Furusaka 古坂紘一 ed. Shō nyū ryōga kyō chū (ĀryaLaṅkāvatāravṛtti; ʼPhags pa lang kar gshegs paʼi ʼgrel pa) [by] Jñānaśrībhadra (Ye shes dpal bzang po) (Tōhoku University Catalogue No. 4018). Sendai: Chibetto butten kenkyū-kai, 1993.27 2.5. Sogdian Translation A Sogdian fragment containing a long citation from Ch. VIII Māṃsabhakṣaṇaparivarta, alongside its French rendering, was published in: E. Benveniste, Textes sogdiens. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Guethner, pp. 2943, 1940. According to Benveniste, this is a rendering from the Chinese. The French scholar does not specify which Chinese translation, but the book contains an appendix (pp. 186-192) 26 The Classical Japanese kundoku-style rendering goes as follows: 其の四卷は、迴文 盡さず, ばうげんえいてつ そ げ 語 西音に順ひ，髦彦 英 哲 をして措解由無からしめ, 愚類庸夫をして強推邪解せしむる を致せり。其の十卷は、文品少しく具はると雖も, 聖意は顯れ難く、字を加へ、文を混 なづ とどこほら ふるは、意を泥 み，或は錯有るを致し，遂に明明なる正理をして方言に 滯 らしむ。 つまび 聖上は、此の通り難きを慨き，復た更に譯せしむ。今則ち五の梵本を 詳 らかにし，二 かんが の漢文を 勘 へ，其の得る所を取り，其の失ふ所を正す。優業を累載し，當に其の旨を こいねが ぐわめう 盡すべし。 庶 はくは、學者をして幸ひに訛 謬 無らしめんことを。 27 The edition collates only those Laṅkāvatārasūtra passages directly relevant to the vṛtti. This, of course, does not diminish its scholarly value especially in view of its primary objective, i.e. to offer an edition of Jñānaśrībhadra’s Commentary. Furthermore, the collated passages are a welcome addition to Nanjio’s edition. For the Sanskrit text, Hadano et el. collated 4 manuscripts in the Tokyo University Library collection, 2 manuscripts of Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, alongside Nanjio’s edition and Vaidya’s edition. For the Tibetan version, the editors collated the Co-ne, sDe dge, sNar thang, Peking Canons as well as 1 Dunhuang manuscript in the Pelliot’s collection of the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, and 1 manuscript in the British Museum Collection. The edition also includes all three Chinese translations as contained in the Taishō Canon 大正藏 and the [Second Korean Edition of the] Korean Canon 高麗版 as well as numerous Dunhuang 敦煌 manuscripts in the Beijing Library Collection and Stein Collection. 24 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey with P. Demiéville’s rendering of Guṇabhadra’s version (see 2.3.2. above).28 2.6. Khotanese Parallel The Khotanese text Mañjuśrīnairātmyāvatārasūtra (lines 181-189) contains (or cites) verses identical to the Laṅkāvatārasūtra (vv. 871-879; Nanjio ed. pp. 374-375). The Khotanese version is edited, translated, and discussed by Ronald Eric Emmerick, ‘Some Verses from the Laṅkāvatārasūtra in Khotanese’, in A Green Leaf: Papers in Honour of Professor Jes A. Asmussen [Acta Iranica 28], pp. 125-133. Leiden: Brill, 1988. 3. Traditional Commentaries 3.1. There only two extant Indian commentaries on the sutra, both preserved in Tibetan translations:29 3.1.1. Jñānaśrībhadra, ʼPhags pa lang kar gshegs paʼi ʼgrel pa (*Āryalaṅkāvatāravṛtti) P #5519; D #4018 (for modern edition, see 2.4. above) 3.1.2. Jñānavajra, ʼPhags pa lang kar gshegs pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen poʼi mdoʼi ʼgrel pa de bzhin gshegs paʼi snying poʼi rgyan zhes bya ba (*Āryalaṅkāvatāranāmamahāyānasūtravṛtti Tathāgatahṛdayālaṃkāra nāma) 3.2. The number of Eastern Asian commentaries is impressive. Detailed lists are found in Yamakami’s ‘Introduction’ to his translation in the Kokuyaku daizōkyō (see 4.1. below; pp. 4-5), Tokiwa’s ‘Introduction’ to his rendering in the Kokuyaku issaikyō, pp. 65-66 (see 4.2. below), Takasaki’s Ryōga kyō, pp. 419-416 (4.3. below), and Okumura 2014, 73-75 (see 7.2. below). Here I shall only mention Kokan Shiren’s 虎關師錬 (1278-1346) Treatise on the Essence of the Buddha’s Words 佛語心論, in 18 scrolls 巻, completed in 1324.30 See also Yoshida Yutaka 吉田豊, ‘Sogudo-go butten kaisetsu’ ソグド語仏典解説. Nairiku Ajia gengo no kenkyu 内陸アジア言語の研究 7 (1992): 95-119, (especially p. 109; cf. p. 114, note 38) (available online: http://ir.library.osaka-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/11094/18757/1/sial07095.pdf). 29 For a presentation of these two commentaries, see Kimura 2007 (section 7.2. below). For translations from Chinese commentaries, see Hadano et al. 1993, pp. VII ff. (see 2.4. above). See also Okumura 2014, 72-73. 30 Kokan Shiren was ordained on Mt Hiei at the age of 10. Later, his training and scholarly activity was mainly associated with the Rinzai Zen tradition although he also maintained a lifelong interest in Tantric teachings. Kokan Shiren is also known for his Genkō shakusho 元亨釋 書, the first traditional history of Buddhism in Japan (see Suzuki gakujutsu zaidan 鈴木学術財 団 ed. Nihon Daizōkyō 日本大藏經. Enlarged and Revised Edition 増補改訂. Volume 97: Kaidai 1 解題一. Tokyo: Kōdan-sha, 1977, pp. 47-51). 28 25 Florin Deleanu The work, which comments upon Guṇabhadra’s translation of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra (see 2.3.2. above), has been the most influential work of its kind in Japan, continuing to be studied by scholars and students to our day. The standard modern edition is found in: Suzuki gakujutsu zaidan 鈴木学術財団 ed. Nihon Daizōkyō 日本大藏經. Enlarged and Revised Edition 増補改訂. Volume 10: Hōdō-bu shōsho 5 方等部 章疏五. Tokyo: Kōdan-sha, 1973, pp. 1-353. 4. Translations into Classical Japanese (Kundoku 訓讀 style) 4.1. Yamakami Sōgen 山上曹源 tr. Kokuyaku daijō nifu Ryōga kyau 國譯大乘入楞伽 經. In Kokuyaku daizōkyō 國譯大藏經, Vol. 4. Tokyo: Kokumin bunko kankō-kai, 1915. [Translation of Śikṣānanda’s 實叉難陀 Chinese rendering; see 2.3.4. above] 4.2. Tokiwa Daijō 常盤大定 tr. Nifu Ryōga kyau 入楞伽經. In Kokuyaku issaikyō. Indo senjutsu-bu: Kyōshū-bu 7 國譯一切經 印度撰述部 經集七. Tokyo: Daitō shuppan-sha, 1929 (originally published); 1989 (revised edition). [Translation of Bodhiruci’s 菩提留支 Chinese rendering; see 2.3.3. above] 4.3. Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道. Ryōga kyō 楞伽經 (Butten kōza 佛典講座, Vol. 17) Tokyo: Daizō shuppan kabushiki gaisha, 1980. [Translation of roughly one fourth of Guṇabhadra’s 求那跋陀羅 Chinese rendering; see 2.3.2. above] 4.4. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. Ryōga abatsutara hō kyō: Gunabatsudara yaku honbun kōtei to kundoku, Kanbun 楞伽阿跋多羅寶經 ― 求那跋陀羅譯 本文校訂と 訓読 ―楞伽宝経四巻本の研究―漢文― . Osaka: private publication, 2003. [Translation the entire text of Guṇabhadra’s 求那跋陀羅 Chinese rendering; see 2.3.2. above] 4.5. Takasaki Jikido 高崎直道 and Horiuchi Toshio 堀内俊郎 tr. Ryōgakyō (Ryōga Abatsutara Hōkyō). 楞伽経(楞伽阿跋多羅宝経). In Shin-kokuyaku daizōkyō, Nyoraizō Yuishiki-bu Vol. VIII 新国訳大蔵経 8 如来蔵・唯識部. Tokyo: Daizō shuppan, 2015. [Translation the entire text of Guṇabhadra’s 求那跋陀羅 Chinese rendering; see 2.3.2. above] 5. Modern Translations 5.1. Japanese (Translations from the Sanskrit) 5.1.1. Nanjō Bun’yū 南條文雄 and Izumi Hōkei 泉芳璟 tr. Bonbun Nyū ryōga kyō: 26 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey hōyaku 梵文 入楞伽經 邦譯. Kyoto: Nanjo Sensei koki kinen shukuga-kai, 1927. 5.1.2. Kōju-kai 光壽會 tr. Bonbun hōyaku: Nyū ryōga kyō 梵文邦譯 入楞伽經. Kyoto: Kōju-kai honbu, 1936. 5.1.3. Yasui Kōsai 安井広済 tr. Bonbun wayaku Nyū ryōga kyō 梵文和訳 入楞伽經. Kyoto: Hōzō-kan, 1976. [Probably, the most faithful translation of the text in any modern language. It also contains a helpful list of suggested corrections (pp. 336-346) to Nanjio’s Sanskrit edition (see 2.1.2. above). Unfortunately, it is not an annotated translation, which makes the text less accessible to lay readers.] 5.1.4. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸 tr. Lankā ni iru: Bonbun Nyū ryōga kyō no zenyaku to kenkyū. 『ランカーに入る』―梵文入楞伽経の全訳と研究―. Hanazono daigaku Kokusai zengaku kenkyūjo 花園大学禅学研究所, Kenkyū hōkoku 研 究報告, Vol. II 第二冊, 2 vols. 1994. 5.1.5. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸 tr. Lankā ni iru: Daijō no shisō to jissen no hōkyō: Fukugen bonbun no nihongo yakuchū to kaisetsu 『ランカーに入る』大乗の 思想と実践の宝経―復元梵文の日本語譯注と解説―. Osaka: private publication, 2003. [Japanese translation of the author’s own Sanskrit reconstruction of Guṇabhadra’s version of the text; see 2.1.6. above; cf. also 5.3.2. below] 5.2. Modern Chinese 5.2.1 Lai Yonghai 頼永海 tr. Lenqie jing 楞伽經. In Foguang jingdian congshu 佛光 經典叢書 1166. Sanzhong [Taibei-xian]: Foguang chuban sheye, 2002. [Translation of Śikṣānanda’s Chinese rendering; see 2.3.4. above] 5.2.2. Tan Xiyong 談錫永. Ru lenqie jing fanben xinyi 入楞伽經梵本新譯. Taibei: Quanfo wenhua, 2005.31 [Although declared to be ‘a new translation from the Sanskrit’, this seems to be a rendering largely based on Suzuki’s English translation (see 5.3.1. below), with the occasional consultation of Yasui’s and Tokiwa’s Japanese translations (see 5.1.3. and 5.1.5. respectively).] 5.2.3. Huang Baosheng 黄宝生, translated and annotated. Fan-han duikan Ru Lengqie jing 梵 汉 对 勘 入 楞 伽 经 . Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, 2011. [Translation from the Sanskrit original, accompanied by Guṇabhadra’s and Śikṣānanda’s Chinese renderings; see 2.3.2. and 2.3.4. respectively] 5.3. English 31 The translation is also available at: http://www.onceseal.com/category/lankavatara-sutra/ 27 Florin Deleanu 5.3.1. Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki. The Lankavatara Sutra: A Mahayana Text Translated for the first time from the original Sanskrit. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., 1932 (originally published); 1956 (reprint). [In spite of its imperfections, it remains a ‘classic’ of the field.] 5.3.2. Gishin Tokiwa. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtram: A Jewel Scripture of Mahāyāna Practice – An English Translation – A Study of the Four-Fascicle Laṅkāvatārasūtra Ratna Sūtram. Osaka: private publication, 2003. 5.3.3. Thomas Cleary tr. The Lankavatara Sutra: The Heart of Buddhism. (Translated from the Original Sanskrit) [Kindle DX version], 2012. Available at: Amazon.com <http://www.amazon.com>. 5.3.4. Red Pine, translation and commentary. The Lankavatara Sutra: A Zen Text [Kindle DX version]. Berkeley: Counterpoint, 2012. Available at: Amazon.com <http://www.amazon.com>. [English rendering of Guṇabhadra’s Chinese translation; see 2.3.2. above] 5.4. German 5.4.1. Karl-Heinz Golzio tr. Die makellose Wahrheit erschauen: Die Lehre von der höchsten Bewusstheit und absoluten Erkenntnis Das Lankavatara-Sutra Bern: O.W. Barth, 1996. [It claims to be a translation from the Sanskrit original but more often than not it appears to be a rendering of or heavily relying on Suzuki’s English translation; see 5.3.1. above.] 5.5. French 5.5.1. Patrick Carré tr., Soûtra de l’Entrée à Lankâ, traduit de la version chinoise de Shikshânanda. Paris: Fayard, 2006. [As stated in its subtitle, this a translation from Śikṣānanda’s Chinese rendering; see 2.3.4. above.] 5.6. Nepalese 5.6.1. Yadunātha Prasād Dubey ed. and tr. The Saddharma Laṅkāvatārasūtra: vaipulya sūtra. Varanasi: Bauddha Bharati, 2006. 5.7. Newari 5.7.1. Divya Vajra Vajrācārya tr. Saddharmalaṃkāvatārasūtram: Mūla saṃskṛta, nepāla bhāṣā sahita. Lalitpur: Loṭas Risarc Senṭar, 1993. 5.8. Russian 5.8.1. Yu Kan tr. Lankavatara-sutra. Perevod c sanskrita vsego teksta sutru (Nanjio 28 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey edition) (2008).32 Available at: http://daolao.ru/Lankavatara/lanka_full/lanka_ogl.htm 5.9. Partial Translations, Summaries, Anthologies33 5.9.1. (A) Dwight Goddard. Self-Realization of Noble Wisdom: A version Based on Dr. Suzuki’s translation of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra. Thetford, 1932. Reprinted as: (B) D.T. Suzuki tr., Dwight Goddard, compiled and edited. The Lankavatara Sutra: An Epitomized Version. Varanasi: Pilgrims Publishing, 2005. [A summary of Suzuki’s English translation (see 5.3.1. above). In spite of its popularity – as witnessed below, the book has been translated in many modern languages – Goddard’s version contains many imperfections, even distortions, which are not found as such in Suzuki’s translation. Although the summary succeeds in conveying the basic thrust of the text, it should be used with much caution.] 5.9.2. Kamiya Masatoshi 神谷麻俊. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō “Rāvana no koi” no wayaku’ 入 楞 伽 経 「 ラ ー ヴ ァ ナ の 請 い 」 の 和 訳 . Komazawa daigaku daigakuin bukkyōgaku kenkyūkai nenpō 駒沢大学大学院仏教学研究会年報 6 (1972): 14-26. [Japanese translation of Chapter I from the Sanskrit.] 5.9.3. Kamiya Masatoshi 神谷麻俊. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō “Sanman rokusen no issai hōmon no shūshū” no shō no wayaku (1)’ 入楞伽経「三万六千の一切法門の収集」の 章の和訳 (一). Komazawa daigaku daigakuin bukkyōgaku kenkyūkai nenpō 駒沢 大学大学院仏教学研究会年報 7 (1973): 12-23. 5.9.4. Kamiya Masatoshi 神谷麻俊. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō “Sanman rokusen no issai hōmon no shūshū” no shō no wayaku (2)’ 入楞伽経「三万六千の一切法門の収集」の 章の和訳 (二). Komazawa daigaku daigakuin bukkyōgaku kenkyūkai nenpō 駒沢 大学大学院仏教学研究会年報 8 (1974): 11-20. [5.9.3. and 5.9.4. translate large parts of Chapter II from the Sanskrit into Japanese.] 5.9.5. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō Sanman rokusen issai hō jū bon yakuchū (1)’ 入楞伽経三万六千一切法集品訳註（一）. Tōyōgaku ronsō 東洋 学論叢 2 (1977): 91-193. 5.9.6. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō Sanman rokusen issai hō jū bon yakuchū [2]’ 入楞伽経三万六千一切法集品訳註〔二〕.34 Tōyōgaku kenkyū 東 More precisely, the website notation tells us that it is a translation from the Sanskrit as well as Chinese with the help of Suzuki’s and Tokiwa’s English renderings. 33 For partial translations in Western languages, see also John Powers. The Yogācāra School of Buddhism: A Bibliography. Metuchen, N.J. & London: The American Theological Library Association and The Sacrecrow Press Inc., 1991, pp. 16-17. 34 No numeration in the original but the contribution represents the second instalment of the 32 29 Florin Deleanu 洋学研究 12 (1978): 123-130. 5.9.7. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō Sanman rokusen issai hō jū bon yakuchū (3)’「入楞伽経三万六千一切法集品訳註（三）. Tōyōgaku ronsō 東洋 学論叢 3 (1978): 87-172. [5.9.5., 5.9.6., and 5.9.7. translate Chapter II from the Sanskrit into Japanese.] 5.9.10. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō Mujōshō bon, Genkan bon, Nyorai jō mujō bon, Henge bon yakuchū’ 入楞伽経無常性品・現観品・如来常無常品・ 変化品訳註. Tōyōgaku ronshū 東洋学論叢 6 (1981): 1-134. [Japanese translation from the Sanskrit of Chapters III, IV, V, and VII] 5.9.11. Tsuchida Ryūtarō 土田龍太郎 tr. Nyū ryōga kyō 入楞伽經. In Budda, Daijō bukkyō shū 仏陀・大乗仏教集, edited by Nakamura Hajime. Machida: Tamagawa daigaku shuppanbu, 1984. [Translation from the Sanskrit into Japanese of part of Chapter I.] 5.9.12. Karl H. Potter. Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies. Vol. VIII: Buddhist Philosophy from 100 to 350 A.D. ‘Author Unknown, Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1999, pp. 334-346. [Synopsis based on Suzuki’s translation (see 5.3.1. above) and collated with Vaidya’s edition (see 2.1.3. above).]35 5.9.13. Nakamura Hajime 中村元. Kegon kyō 華厳経, Ryōga kyō 楞伽経. In Gendai goyaku Daijō butten 現代語訳 大乗仏典, Vol. 5. Tokyo: Tōkyō shoseki kabushiki gaisha, 2003. [Representative passages of the sutra translated into Japanese from the Chinese versions collated with the Sanskrit original.] 5.9.14. Yin Zhi Shakya OHY (Hortensia de la Torre) tr. El Sutra Lankavatara, 2004. Available at: http://www.jardimdharma.org.br/apostilas/sutra/18_sutra_lankavatara.pdf#search='De+Lankavatara+Soetra' [Spanish translation of Goddard’s version; see 5.9.1. above] 5.9.15. Yu Kan tr. Lankavatara-sutra. Sokrashchennaya D. Goddardom versiya perevoda D.T. Suzuki dlya “Buddiĭskoĭ Biblii”, 2005. Available at: http://daolao.ru/Lankavatara/lanka_short/lankavatara.htm [Russian translation of Goddard’s version; see 5.9.1. above]. 5.9.16. Alberto Mengoni tr. Il Lankavatarasutra: L’auto-realizzazione della nobile sagessa, 2005. Available at: http://www.centronirvana.it/lankavatarasutra.htm [Italian translation of Goddard’s version; see 5.9.1. above] 5.9.17. William Bagley tr. A Re-translation of the Eighth Chapter of the Lankavatara Sutra and Commentary, originally published in 2005 on: www.nirvanasutra.org.uk, now available at: author’s translation of Chapter II (see above and below). 35 For a brief study preceding the synopsis, see Potter 1999 in Section 7.2. below. 30 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey http://www.shabkar.org/download/pdf/Lankavatara_Sutra_On_Vegetarianism.pdf [As clearly stated in the Preface, this is a rewriting of Suzuki’s translation into a more readable style, accompanied by Bagley’s own commentary.] 5.9.17. Silfong Tsun tr. Chapter 16: Do not eat meat, 2011. Available at: http://www.fodian.net/world/671_16.html [English rendering of Bodhiruci’s Chinese translation (see 2.3.3. above) of the Chapter on Consuming Meat.] 5.9.18. Bhiksuni Rátana tr. De Lankavatara Soetra. n.d. Available at: http://www.buddha-dharma.eu/canonieke-teksten-verzamelpagina.html [This is a Dutch rendering which seems to be based on Suzuki’s English translation (see 5.3.1. above). The translation is still in progress, having reached Chapter Four when I last accessed the site on 6 June 2018.] 5.9.19. [No translator/editor name] Sutra Lankavatara, n.d. Available at: http://www.easterntradition.org/article/es/Lankavatara%20Sutra.pdf [Spanish translation of Goddard’s version; see 5.9.1. above] 5.9.20. James A. Kline, Lankavatara Sutra, Shortened and Simplified, n.d. [The summary is included in Buddhism for Beginners, e-book, n.d.] 6. Index Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki. An Index to the Lankavatara Sutra (Nanjio Edition). 2nd revised and enlarged edition. Kyoto: The Sanskrit Buddhist Texts Publishing Society, 1934. 7. Secondary Sources36 7.1. Monographs and Doctoral Theses Jakob Wilhelm Hauer. ‘Das Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra und das Sāṃkhya’. Beiträge zur Indischen Sprachwiss. u. Religionsgesch. Heft I. Stuttgart, 1927. [Brief study issued as indepent publication.] Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki. Studies in the Lankavatara Sutra: One of the most important texts of Mahayana Buddhism, in which almost all its principal tenets are presented, including the teaching of Zen.37 London and Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul See also Nakamura Hajime. Indian Buddhism: A Survey with Bibliographical Notes. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, [1980] 1989, pp. 230-323; John Powers. The Yogācāra School of Buddhism: A Bibliography. Metuchen, N.J. & London: The American Theological Library Association and The Sacrecrow Press Inc., 1991; Karl Potter. Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies: Bibliography. 3rd edition. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1995. Cf. Takasaki 1980 (see 4.3. above), pp. 21-27. 37 No diacritics used in the title. 36 31 Florin Deleanu Ltd., 1930; reprint 1975.38 Erich Wolff. Zur Lehre vom Bewusstsein (Vijñānavāda) bei den späteren Buddhisten: unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Laṅkāvatārasūtra. Heidelberg: Carl Winter's Universitätsbuchhandlung, 1930. Florin Giripescu Sutton. Existence and Enlightenment in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra: A Study in the Ontology and Epistemology of the Yogācāra School of Mahāyāna Buddhism. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991.39 John Michael Audes McVey. Bhrantivada: Reading the Lankavatara Sutra in Lieu of Metaphysics. Dissertation thesis, Montreal, 1991. Brian Edward Brown. The Buddha Nature: A Study of the Tathāgatagarbha and Ālayavijñāna. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1991.40 Donald D. Garcia. The Lankavatara and Platform Sutras: Contraries Apart and Polarities Together. Dissertation thesis, 1997. Suah Kim. A Study of the Indian Commentaries on the Laṅkāvatārasūtra: Madhyamaka and Mind-only Philosophy. Dissertation thesis, Harvard University, 2002. Aucke D. Forsten. Between Certainty and Finitude: A Study of Laṅkāvatārasūtra Chapter Two. Berlin: Lit, 2006.41 Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道 . Daijō ki shin ron, Ryōga kyō 大乗 起 信論 ・楞 伽經 . (Published as Volume VIII of the author’s collected works: Takasaki Jikidō chosakushū 高崎直道著作集) Tokyo: Shunjū-sha, 2009. Ligeia Lugli. The Conception of Language in Indian Mahāyāna: With Special Reference to the Laṅkāvatāra. PhD Thesis, Department of Religions, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 2011. Khamakhyia N. Tiwary. Laṅkāvatārasūtra. Delhi: Shivalik Prakashan, 2012. * Of all the traditions in which the Laṅkāvatārasūtra came to play an important role, Chan/Zen 禪 Buddhism has claimed a special affinity to the text.42 Aside from D.T. Reviewed by C. Hamilton. ‘D.T. Suzuki: Studies in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. Journal of Asian and Oriental Studies 3 (1932) 1-3. 39 Reviewed (and harshly criticised) by J.W. de Jong in ‘Florin Giripescu Sutton, Existence and Enlightenment in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra: A Study in the Ontology and Epistemology of the Yogācāra School of Mahāyāna Buddhism’. Indo-Iranian Journal 36, no. 2 (1993): 146-149. 40 Mainly the chapter ‘The Ālayavijñāna in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra and the Ch’eng Wei-Shih Lun’, pp. 179-244. 41 The volume is a development of the author’s doctoral thesis entitled The Second Chapter of the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra: A Buddhological and Philosophical Study submitted in 2004 to the Leiden University. 42 The scholar-monk Daoxuan 道宣 famously states in the Sequel to Biographies of Eminent 38 32 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey Suzuki’s pioneer work published in 1930 (see above; cf. also Suzuki 1922 below), which reflects a more or less traditional view on the subject (pp. 44-65), John McRae. The Northern School and the Formation of Early Ch’an Buddhism. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 1987. [Mainly Chapter I: ‘Bodhidharma, His Immediate Successors, and the Masters of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, pp. 15-29] contains an in-depth analysis of the key role, nominal or real, played by the Laṅkāvatārasūtra in the development of early Chan. For detailed studies in Japanese, see Nishi 1964, Ibuki 1998, Ibuki 1999, Ishii 1999, Yanagi 2008, Yanagi 2011, Yanagi 2014, Tokiwa 2011, Willemen 2014, etc. (all listed in section 7.2. below). 7.2. Articles43 Satis Chandra Vidyabhushana. ‘Analysis of the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 4.3 I (1905): 831-837. Satis Chandra Vidyabhushana. ‘Notes on the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 4.3 I (1906): 159-164. Suzuki Daisetsu 鈴木大拙. ‘Daruma to Ryōga kyō’ 達磨と楞伽經. Bukkyō kenkyū 佛教研究 11 (1922): 30-51. Giuseppe Tucci. ‘Notes on the Laṅkāvatāra’. Indian Historical Quarterly 4, no. 3 (1923): 545-556. Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki. ‘The Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra as a Mahāyāna Text: Especial Relation to the Teaching of Zen Buddhism’. Eastern Buddhism 4 (1926-1928): 199-298. Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki. ‘An Introduction to the Study of the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Eastern Buddhist 5 (1929-1931): 1-79. Saitō Tetsuyoshi 斉藤哲吉. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru jikaku shōchi no kyōgai ni tsuite’. 楞伽經に於ける自覺聖智の境界に就いて. Zengaku kenkyū 禪學研究 14 (1931): 79-104. Suzuki Teitarō 鈴木貞太郎. ‘Ryōga kyō kenkyū joron’ 楞伽經研究序論. Nihon bukkyōgaku kyōkai nenpō 日本佛教學協會年報 3 (1931): 333ff. Surendranath Dasgupta. ‘Philosophy of Laṅkāvatāra’. In Buddhistic Studies, edited by B.C. Law, 859-876. Calcutta, 1931. Sakurabe Bunkyō 桜部文鏡. ‘Shuko Makatai kyō to Ryōga kyō to no chibetto-bon Monks 續高僧傳: ‘In the beginning, the Meditation Master [Bodhi]dharma gave [Hui]ke [Guṇabhadra’s translation of] the Laṅkāvatārasūtra in four scrolls saying, “I look [far and wide] in the Land of Han [China], and there is only this scripture [worth taking as spiritual guidance]. Practise based [upon its teachings], and thou shalt naturally attain Liberation.”’ (初達摩禪師以 四卷《楞伽》授可曰：“我觀漢地惟有此經。仁者依行，自得度世。” T 50.552b). 43 The list covers only studies in Japanese, English, German, and French. Unfortunately, time and tide have not been lenient enough to allow me a search for studies in other languages. For contributions in Russian, see the online resource: lirs.ru/do/trans-lanka.html. 33 Florin Deleanu ni tsuite’ 衆許摩訶帝經と楞伽經との西藏本に就て. Ōtani gakuhō 大谷學報 54 (1934): 60-67. Abe Fumio 阿部文雄. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru “arayashiki” to “nyoraizō” to ni tsuite’ 楞伽經に於ける『阿頼耶識』と『如来藏』とに就いて. Komazawa daigaku bukkyō gakkai nenpō 駒澤大學佛教學會年報 5, no. 1 (1934): 23-43. Itō Dōgen 伊藤洞源. ‘Ryōga kyō ni tsuite’ 楞伽經に就て. Komazawa daigaku bukkyō gakkai nenpō 駒澤大學佛教學會年報 6, no. 2 (1936): 130-150. Yamaguchi Susumu 山口益. ‘Chikisshōken no Nyū Ryōga kyō chū ni tsuite’ 智吉祥賢 の入楞伽經註について. Nihon bukkyōgaku kyōkai nenpō 日本佛教學協會年報 8 (1936):121-155. P.C. Divanji. ‘Laṅkāvatārasūtra on Non-Vegetarian Diet’. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Institute (Poona) 20 (1938-1939): 317-322. Ogawa Kōkan 小川弘貫. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru Nyoraizō shisō’ 楞伽経に於ける如来 蔵思想. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 9, no. 1 (1961): 213216. Yasui Kōsai 安井広済. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni okeru nikujiki no kinshi’ 入楞伽経におけ る肉食の禁止. Ōtani gakuhō 大谷学報 58 (1963):1-13. Fuji Ryūsei 藤隆生. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru ichi, ni no mondai’『楞伽経』における一・ 二の問題. Ryūkoku daigaku Bukkyō bunka kenkyūjo kiyō 龍谷大学仏教文化研究 所紀要 3 (1964): 153-156. Nishi Giyū 西義雄. ‘Daruma no Zen to Ryōga kyō no kankei’ 達摩の禅と楞伽経の関 係. PHILOSOPHIA 48 (1964): 3-23. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni okeru fushō no imi ni tsuite’ 入楞伽経に おける「不生」の意味について. Shūkyō kenkyū 宗教研究 38, no. 2 (1965): 78-81. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō Nyorai jō mujō bon no chūshakuteki kenkyū’ 入楞伽経如来常無常品の註釈的研究 . Tōyōgaku kenkyū 東洋学学研究 2 (1967): 39-47. Akira Suganuma. ‘The Five Dharmas (Pañcadharma) in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 15 no. 2 (1967): 963-956. Yasui Kōsai 安井広済. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō “Mujō bon” no genten kenkyū’ 入楞伽経「無 常品」の原典研究. Ōtani daigaku kenkyū nenpō 大谷大学研究年報 20 (1967): 65-133. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni okeru yuishin-setsu ni tsuite’ 入楞伽経 における唯心説について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 16, no. 2 (1968): 162-166. Akira Suganuma. ‘Citta-mātra in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 16, 2 (1968): 636-640. Yasui Kōsai 安井広済. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no genten kenkyū’ 入楞伽経の原典研究. Ōtani gakuhō 大谷学報 48, no. 2 (1968): 1-21. 34 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey Takagaki Tadashi 高垣忠司. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō daihasshō ni tsuite no ni, san no mondai’ 入楞伽経第八章についての二、三の問題. Bukkyō gakkai-hō 仏教学会報 2 (1969): 35-38. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō Setsuna bon no genten kenkyū’ 入楞伽経 刹那品の原典研究. Tōyō daigaku kiyō 東洋大学紀要 23 (1969): 39-57. Ujike Akio 氏 家 昭 雄 . ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no yuishin-setsu’ 入 楞 伽 経 の 唯 心 説 . Mikkyōgaku kenkyū 密教学研究. 2 (1970): 69-81. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni okeru dharmanaya ni tsuite’ 入楞伽経に おける dharmanaya について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 18, no. 2 (1970): 127-132. Kan Eishō 菅英尚. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru yuishiki-setsu no kenkyū’ 楞伽経に於 ける唯識説の研究. Dhammadīpa 1 (1970): 8. [A summary of the author’s graduation thesis.] Akira Suganuma. ‘Two Forms of Teaching in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 18, no. 2 (1970): 568-573. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no fu ryū monji-ron’ 入楞伽経の不立文字 論. Tōyō daigaku kiyō 東洋大学紀要 25 (1971): 33-66. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni okeru gohō-setsu no kenkyū’ 入楞伽経に おける五法説の研究. Tōyōgaku kenkyū 東洋学研究 5 (1971): 189-207. Miyamoto Kenji 宮本献璽. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni okeru “yuishin”’ 入楞伽経における 「唯心」. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 19, no. 2 (1971): 369-372. Kenji Miyamoto. ‘Cittamātra in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 19, no. 2 (1971): 853-861. Funahashi Naoya 舟橋尚哉. ‘Seshin to Ryōga kyō to no zengo-ron ni tsuite’ 世親と楞 伽経との前後論について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 20, no. 1 (1971): 321-326. Yoshizu Yoshihide 吉津宜英. ‘Shikan Ryōga kyō to jikkan Ryōga kyō’ 四巻楞伽経 と十巻楞伽経. Shūgaku kenkyū 宗学研究 14 (1972): 111-116. Yasui Kōsai 安井広済. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni arawareru shiki no gakusetsu ni tsuite’ 入楞伽経にあらわれる識の学説について. Ōtani gakuhō 大谷学報 52, no. 2 (1972): 1-16. Tanikawa Taikyō 谷川泰教. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni mirareru yin’yōbun ni tsuite’ 入楞伽 経に見られる引用文について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研 究 21, no. 2 (1973): 156-157. Kamiya Masatoshi 神谷麻俊. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no jishō shōchi’ 入楞伽経の自証聖智. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 21, no. 2 (1973): 158-159. Tanikawa Taikyō 谷川泰教. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō kenkyū nōto’ 入楞伽経研究ノート. Bukkyōgaku kaihō 仏教学会報 6 (1974): 67-71. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no nyoraizō-setsu ni tsuite’ 入楞伽経の如 35 Florin Deleanu 来蔵説について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 22, no. 2 (1974): 90-97. Akira Suganuma. ‘A Study of the Tathāgatagarbha Theory in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 22 no. 2 (1974): 622-629. Tanikawa Taikyō 谷川泰教. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni okeru muki ni tsuite’ 入楞伽経にお ける無記について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 22, no. 2 (1974): 381-385. Yasui Kōsai 安井広済. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni arawareru nin pō ni muga no kyōsetsu ni tsuite’. 入 楞 伽 経 に あ ら わ れ る 人 法 二 無 我 の 教 説 に つ い て . Bukkyōgaku seminā 仏教学セミナー 19 (1974): 11-25. Kamiya Masatoshi 神谷麻俊. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no shin (citta)’. 入楞伽経の心（citta）. Komazawa daigaku bukkyō gakubu ronshū 駒沢大学仏教学部論集 5 (1974): 25-34. Kamiya Masatoshi 神谷麻俊. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no “shin” no ichi-kōsatsu’. 入楞伽経の 「心」の一考察. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 23, no. 2 (1975): 239-242. Winston P. Barclay. ‘On Words and Meaning: The Attitude Toward Discourse in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Numen 22 (1975): 70-79. Mark A. Ehman. ‘The Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. In Buddhism: A Modern Perspective, edited by Ch. Prebish, 112-117. University Park: Pennsylvania University Press, 1975. Gishin Tokiwa. ‘The 信不及 (shin fugyū) as expounded in the Laṅkāvatāra’, Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 24, no. 1 (1975): 6-11. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no nyoraizō-ron’ 入楞伽経の如来蔵論. Tōyō daigaku daigakuin kiyō 東洋大学大学院紀要 13 (1976): 67-96. Shimizu Yōkō 清水要晃. ‘Ryōga kyō no nyoraizō shisō ni tsuite’. 楞伽経の如来蔵思 想について. Ōsaki gakuhō 大崎学報 128 (1976): 111-125. Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no yuishiki-setsu’ 入楞伽経の唯識説. Bukkyōgaku 仏教学 1 (1976): 1-26. Shimizu Yōkō 清水要晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no shiki no san sō setsu ni tsuite’ 入楞伽経 の識の三相説について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 25, no. 1 (1976): 162-163. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. ‘Rankā āvatāra sūtora’ ランカー・アヴァターラ・スート ラ. Zen bunka kenkyūjo kiyō 禅文化研究所紀要 8 (1976): 135-157. Kamiya Masatoshi 神谷麻俊. ‘Ryōga kyō no dharma to bhāva’ 楞伽経の dharma と bhava. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 25, no. 2 (1977): 130-131. Suganuma Akira 菅沼晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no yuishin-ron’ 入楞伽経の唯心論. Tōyōgaku kenkyū 東洋学研究 11 (1977): 63-82. Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no ito suru mono’ 入楞伽経の意図する もの. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 26, no. 1 (1977): 111-118. 36 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey Hamada Kōsei 浜田耕生. ‘Giyaku Ryōga kyō ni tsuite’ 魏訳『楞伽経』について. Dōhō bukkyō 同朋仏教 11 (1977): 13-37. Kan Eishō. ‘Some Problems in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra (1)’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 25, no. 2 (1977): 980-978. Gishin Tokiwa. ‘“svacittamâtra”: The Basic Standpoint of the Laṅkāvatāra sūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 26, no. 1 (1977): 34-39.44 Gishin Tokiwa. ‘The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra Criticizes the Sāṃkhya Thought’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 27, no. 1 (1978): 21-25. Joan Sutherland. ‘Li Hu and the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Journal of Asian Culture 2, no. 1 (1978): 69-102. Kubota Chikara 久保田力. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō ni arawareta sānkuya-setsu’ 『入楞伽経』 に現われたサーンクヤ説. Ronshū 論集 6 (1979): 100-102. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. ‘Bukkyō kyōten Rankā ni iru no sānkuya-setsu hihan’ 仏 教経典『ランカーに入る』のサーンクヤ説批判. Hanazono daigaku kenkyū kiyō 花園大学研究紀要 10 (1979): 117-146. Gishin Tokiwa. ‘“Svacittamâtra”: The Basic Standpoint of the Laṅkāvatāra sūtra (continued)’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 29, no. 1 (1980): 1-6. Shimizu Yōkō 清水要晃. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō Sōyaku no “kakubetsu shushō” ni tsuite’ 『入 楞伽経』宋訳の「各別種性」について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛 教學研究 28, no. 2 (1980): 162-163. Kan Eishō 菅英尚. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru <√jñā> no ruigo’ 『楞伽経』における<√jñā> の類語. (共同研究：佛教の体系と展相の研究). Ryūkoku daigaku Bukkyō bunka kenkyūjo kiyō 龍谷大学佛教文化研究所紀要 19 (1980): 34-42. Kan Eishō 菅英尚. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru yuishin’『楞伽経』における唯心. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 29, no. 1 (1980): 282-285. Arnold Kunst. ‘Some of the Polemics in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. In Studies in Honour of Walpola Rahula, edited by S. Balasooriya et al., 103-112. London: Gordon Fraser, 1980. Jikido Takasaki. ‘Analysis of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra: In Search of Its Original Form’. In Indianisme et Bouddhisme: Mélanges offerts à Mgr Étienne Lamotte, 339-352. Université Catholique de Louvain: Louvain-la-Neuve, 1980.45 Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道. ‘Ryōga kyō no manas (i) ni tsuite’ 『入楞伽経』のマナス (意)について. In Bukkyō no rekishiteki tenkai ni miru sho-keitai: Furuta Shōkin hakushi koki kinen ronshū 仏教の歴史的展開に見る諸形態―古田紹欽博士 古希記念論集, edited by Doctor Furuta Shōkin’s 70th Anniversary 44 Of related interest, see also Gishin Tokiwa. ‘“Svacitta-dṛśya-mātram” in Hakuin Ekaku’s Zen’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 37, no. 2 (1989): 987-981. For the parallel Japanese version of this study, see Takasaki 2010. 45 37 Florin Deleanu Commemorative Committee, 231-252. Tokyo: Sōbun-sha 1981. Jikido Takasaki. ‘The Concept of Manas in the Laṅkāvatāra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 29, no. 2 (1981): 977-970. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. ‘Daijō no kyō Rankā ni iru Daini shō no kiso kenkyū’ 大乗 の経『ランカーに入る』第二章の基礎研究. Hanazono daigaku kenkyū kiyō 花園大学研究紀要 12 (1981): 25-57. Ueyama Daishun 上山大峻. ‘Tonkō shutsudo Enki jutsu Ryōga kyō sho kō’ 敦煌出土 円暉述『楞伽経疏』攷. In Kimura Takeo kyōjū koki kinen: Sōden no kenkyū 木村 武 夫 教 授 古 稀 記 念 ― 僧 伝 の 研 究 ― . edited by the Editor[s] of the Commemorative Volume for the Professor Kimura Takeo’s 70th Anniversary, 231252. Kyoto: Nagata Bunshōdō, 1981. Cristopher Chapple. ‘The Negative Attitude of the Yogavāsiṣṭa and the Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. Journal of Dharma 6 (1981): 34-45. Jikido Takasaki. ‘Sources of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra and Its Position in Mahāyāna Buddhism’. In L.A. Hercus et al. eds. Indological and Buddhist Studies: Volume in Honour of Professor J.W. de Jong on his Sixtieth Birthday, 545-568. Canberra: Australian National University, Faculty of Asian Studies, 1982 [Reprint: Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 1984] Nakagawa Eishō 中川英尚. ‘Ryōga kyō to Seshin yuishiki’『楞伽経』と世親唯識. Mikkyōgaku kenkyū 密教学研究 15 (1983): 69-82. Edward Hamlin. ‘Discourse in the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Journal of Indian Philosophy 11, no. 1 (1983): 269-313. Kubota Chikara 久保田力. ‘Ryōga kyō no keitaiteki seiritsushi-ron’『楞伽経』の形態 的成立史論. Ronshū 論集 11 (1984): 23-43. Ochi Junnin 越智淳仁. ‘Ryōga kyō no Dharmatā-buddha to Niṣyanda-buddha’『楞伽 経』の Dharmatā-buddha と Niṣyanda-buddha. Mikkyō bunka 密教文化 150 (1985): 149-162. Kubota Chikara 久保田力. ‘Ryōga kyō no kōzō to seiritsushi he no gimon’ 楞伽経の 構造と成立史への疑問. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 33, no. 2 (1985): 144-145. Chikara Kubota. ‘A Structural Point of View of the Formation Process of the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 33, no. 2 (1985): 559-560. Kubota Chikara 久保田力. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru nyoraizō-setsu no chii’ 『楞伽経』に おける如来蔵説の地位. Ronshū 論集 12 (1985): 113-115. Katō Seiichi 加藤精一. ‘Shaku Makaen ron ni in’yō sareta Ryōga kyō’ 『釈摩訶衍論』 に引用された『楞伽経』. Buzan gakuhō 豊山学報 31 (1986): 1-14. Maida Mutsuo 米田睦雄. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru nyorai zen’『楞伽経』における如来禅. In Kiritani Junnin Wajō tsuitō ronbunshū 桐渓順忍和上追悼論文集, edited by the Editorial Committee for the Joint Volume of Studies in Memoriam Reverend 38 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey Kiritani Junnin, 353-369. Kyoto: Tankūsha, 1986. Kubota Chikara 久保田力. ‘Ryōga kyō “Mujō bon” matsu shosetsu no kōsei ni tsuite’ 『楞伽経』「無常品」末諸節の構成について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印 度學佛教學研究 35, no. 2 (1987): 50-53. Wada Shinji 和田真二. ‘Suzuki Daisetsu hakushi ni okeru “Ryōga kyō kenkyū” no igi’ 鈴木大拙博士における「楞伽経研究」の意義. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 36, no. 2 (1988): 218-221. Wada Shinji 和田真二. ‘Ryōga kyō chū ni mirareu “shū setsu ni tsū” no mondai’『楞 伽経』中に見られる「宗説二通」の問題. Shūkyō kenkyū 宗教研究 61, no. 4 (1988): 157-159. Kubota Chikara 久保田力. ‘Manashiki to Ryōga kyō’ マナ識と『楞伽経』. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 39, no. 2 (1991): 182-186. Shimazu Genjun 島津現淳. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no “nyojitsu shugyō” ni tsuite’ (1) 『入楞 伽経』の「如実修行」について(一). Dōhō daigaku ronsō 同朋大学論叢 64/65 (1991): 21-38. Gishin Tokiwa. ‘The Historical Significance of the Opening Chapter Rāvaṇādhyeṣaṇā of the Laṅkāvatāra sūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 40, no. 1 (1991): 506-500. Lambert Schmithausen. ‘A Note on Vasubandhu and the Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. Asiatische Studien/Études Asiatique XLIV, no. 1 (1992): 392-397. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō Joshō no rekishiteki igi’ 『入楞伽経』序章 の歴史的意義. Hanazono daigaku kenkyū kiyō 花園大学研究紀要 24 (1992): 23-47. Christian Lindtner. ‘The Laṅkāvatārasūtra in Early Madhyamaka Literature’. In J. Bronkhorst, K. Mimaki, and T.J.F. Tillemans eds. Asiatische Studien/Études Asiatiques (Études bouddhique offertes à Jacques May à lʼoccasion de son soixantecinquième anniversaire) 46 no. 1 (1992): 244-279. Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道. ‘Giyaku Nyū Ryōga kyō no “nyojitsu shugyō” to Ki shin ron’ 魏訳『入楞伽経』の「如実修行」と『起信論』. In Tsukamoto Keishō kyōju kanreki kinen ronbunshū: Chi no kaikō: Bukkyō to kagaku 塚本啓祥教授還暦記念論文集 ― 知 の 邂 逅 : 仏 教 と 科 学 ― ， edited by the Publishing Committee of the Commemorative Volume for Professor Tsukamoto Keishō’s 60th Anniversary, 223238. Tokyo: Kōsei shuppansha, 1993. Shimazu Genjun 島津現淳. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō no “nyojitsu shugyō” ni tsuite’ (2) 『入楞 伽経』の「如実修行」について(二). Dōhō daigaku ronsō 同朋大学論叢 69 (1993): 63-79. Gishin Tokiwa. ‘The Pañcānantaryāṇi of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 43, no. 1 (1994): 16-22. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. ‘Daijō kyōten Rankā ni iru no kenkyū’ 大乗教典『ランカ ーに入る』の研究. Zen bunka kenkyūjo kiyō 禅文化研究所紀要 21 (1995): 1-18. 39 Florin Deleanu Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. ‘Daijō kyōten Rankā ni iru no “go muken gō”’ 大乗経典『ラ ンカーに入る』の「五無間業」. Hanazono daigaku bungakubu kenkyū kiyō 花園大学文学部研究紀要 27 (1995):11-33. Gishin Tokiwa. ‘The manomayakāya of the Laṅkāvatāra Mahāyānasūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 44, no. 1 (1995): 20-24. Wada Shinji 和田真二. ‘Ryōga kyō ni mirareru “ji kaku shōchi” ni tsuite’ 楞伽経に見 られる「自覚聖智」について. Shūkyō kenkyū 宗教研究 71, no. 4 (1998): 197199. Ibuki Atsushi 伊吹敦. ‘Bodaidaruma no Ryōga kyō sho ni tsuite’ (jō) [Part 1] 菩提達磨 の『楞伽経疏』について(上). Tōyōgaku ronsō 東洋学論叢 23 (1998): 1-80. Ibuki Atsushi 伊吹敦. ‘Bodaidaruma no Ryōga kyō sho ni tsuite’ (ge) [Part 2] 菩提達 磨の『楞伽経疏』について(下). Tōyōgaku ronsō 東洋学論叢 24 (1999): 1-33. Karl H. Potter. ‘Author Unknown, Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. In Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies. Vol. VIII: Buddhist Philosophy from 100 to 350 A.D., edited by Karl H. Potter, 332-334. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1999.46 Ōsawa Shōkan 大沢聖寛. ‘Ni kyō ron ni okeru Ryōga kyō no ichi’『二教論』における 『楞伽経』の位置. Buzan gakuhō 豊山学報 43 (2000): 11-34. Koga Eigen 古賀英彦. Ryōga kyō no nyoraizō to Daijō ki shin ron’ 楞伽経の如来蔵 説と大乗起信論. Zen bunka kenkyūjo kiyō 禅文化研究所紀要 25 (2000): 29-56. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. ‘Hō kyō Rankā ni iru no shushi’ 宝経『ランカーに入る』 の主旨. Zen bunka kenkyūjo kiyō 禅文化研究所紀要 25 (2000): 1-28. Asanga Tilakaratne. ‘Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. In Encyclopaedia of Buddhism, Volume VI, Fascicle 2, 292-298. Colombo: The Government of Sri Lanka, 2000. Ishii Kōsei 石井公成. Shoki zenshū to Ryōga kyō’ 初期禅宗と『楞伽経』. Komazawa tanki daigaku kenkyū kiyō 駒沢短期大学研究紀要 29 (2001): 171-189. Koga Hidehiko 古賀英彦. ‘Ryōga kyō kanken’ 楞伽経管見. Zengaku kenkyū 禅学研 究 80 (2001): 239-262. Ishii Kōsei 石井公成. ‘Sokuten bukō “Daijō nyū Ryōga kyō jo” to Hōzō Nyū Ryōga kyō shin gen gi’ 則天武后「大乗入楞伽経序」と法蔵『入楞伽心玄義』. Komazawa daigaku Zen kenkyūjo nenpō 駒沢大学禅研究所年報 13/14 (2002): 25-44. Kimura Toshihiko 木村俊彦. ‘Rudorufu Ottō [Rudolf Otto] to Nyū Ryōga kyō’ ルドル フ・オットーと入楞伽経. Shūkyō kenkyū 宗教研究 76, no. 4 (2003): 405-406. Doi Natsuki 土居夏樹. ‘Ben ken mitsu ni kyō ron ni okeru Ryōga kyō hōbutsu seppō no kaishaku ni tsuite’『弁顕密二教論』における『楞伽経』法仏説法の解釈につ いて. Mikkyō bunka 密教文化 215 (2005): 1-28. Lambert Schmithausen. ‘Some Philological Remarks on Chapter VIII of the 46 Brief introduction to the synopsis of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra (for which see 5.9.2. above). 40 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. In Kan’yaku butten kenkyū no aratana tenkai 漢訳仏典研究の 新たな展開 (Chinese Translation of Buddhist Scriptures: New Discoveries and Perspectives), 85-107. Tokyo: International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies, 2006. [The volume contains the text of the author’s contribution in English as well as its translation into Japanese by Hayashidera Shōshun 林寺正俊.] Chung Yushik 鄭有植. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru funbetsu jishiki’ 『楞伽経』における分 別事識. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 54, no. 2 (2006): 28-31. Chung Yushik 鄭有植. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru khyātivijñāna’『楞伽経』における khyātivijñāna. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 55, no. 2 (2007): 71-74. Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. ‘Nehan gyō ga Ryōga kyō no omona hyōgen shutai dewa nakatta ka’ 涅 槃 経 が 楞 伽 経 の 主 な 表 現 主 体 で は な か っ た か . Rinzaishū Myōshinji-ha kyōgaku kenkyū kiyō 臨済宗妙心寺派教学研究紀要 5 (2007): 1-22. Kimura Seiji 木村誠司. ‘Nyū Ryōga kyō Chibetto ni chūshakusho no igi’ 『入楞伽経』 チベット二注釈書の意義. Komazawa daigaku bukkyō gakubu ronshū 駒沢大学 仏教学部論集』38 (2007): 1-8. Chung Yushik 鄭有植. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru “mittsu no sō”’『楞伽経』における 「三つの相」. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 56, no. 2 (2008): 154-157. Yanagi Mikiyasu 柳幹康. ‘Eka to Eon no ‘Ryōga kyō shishu busshin rikai’ 慧可と慧遠 の『楞伽経』四種仏身理解. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 56, no. 2 (2008): 62-65. Takise Shōjun 瀧瀬尚純. ‘Bussetsu Ryōga kyō zenmon shiddan shō ni tsuite’『仏説楞 伽経禅門悉談章』について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 57, no. 2 (2009): 179-183. Gishin Tokiwa. ‘On the Vijñānavāda of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra’. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 58, no. (2010): 103-107. Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道. ‘Ryōga kyō no sokei’ 『楞伽経』の祖形. In Takasaki Jikidō chosakushū 高崎直道著作集, Volume VI, 445-459. Tokyo: Shunjūsha, 2010.47 Tokiwa Gishin 常盤義伸. ‘Nansen no irui chū gyō to Ryōga kyō no tokaku gyūkaku’ 南泉の異類中行と楞伽経の兎角牛角. Matsugaoka Bunko kenkyū nenpō 松ヶ 岡文庫研究年報 25 (2011): 1-16. Nakamura Honnen 中村本然. ‘Kōbō daishi Kūkai no Nyū Ryōga kyō rikai’ 弘法大師 空海の『入楞伽経』理解. Mikkyōgaku kenkyū 密教学研究 43 (2011): 107-134. Yanagi Mikiyasu 柳幹康. ‘Ryōga kyō to Ni nyū shi gyō ron’『楞伽経』と『二入四行 論』. Indo tetsugaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū インド哲学仏教学研究 18 (2011): 71-85. 47 For the parallel English version of this study, see Takasaki 1980 (see above, in this section). 41 Florin Deleanu Horiuchi Toshio 堀内俊郎. ‘Ryōga kyō tekisuto no sho-mondai’『楞伽経』テキストの 諸問題. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 61, no. 2 (2013): 193-198. Li Zijie 李子捷. ‘Kyōu sho’oku shozō Tonkō shahon Nyū Ryōga kyō sho (Gidai, U 726R) ni tsuite’ 杏雨書屋所蔵敦煌写本『入楞伽経疏』（擬題、羽 726R）について. Nanto bukkyō 南都仏教 98 (2013): 25-40. Okumura Motoyasu 奥村元康. ‘Ryōga kyō no bunkengakuteki kenkyū: “Rabana ō kanjō bon” bon-zō-kan kōtei tekisuto (Sono 1)’ 『楞伽経』の文献学的研究」― 「羅 婆那王勧請品」梵蔵漢校訂テキスト（その１）―. Sengokuyama bukkyōgaku ronshū 仙石山佛教學論集 7 (2014): 53-151. Ishibashi Takeshi 石橋丈史. ‘Ryōga kyō no seiritsu jiki ni tsuite’『楞伽経』の成立時 期について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 62, no. 2 (2014): 115-118. Li Zijie 李 子 捷 . ‘Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra (Ryōga kyō) no nishu nyoraizō-setsu’ Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra（『楞伽経』）の二種如来蔵説. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印 度學佛教學研究 62, no. 2 (2014): 44-47. Yanagi Mikiyasu 柳幹康. ‘Su gyō roku to Ryōga kyō’『宗鏡録』と『楞伽経』. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 63, no. 1 (2014): 49-53. Klaus Wille. ‘Survey of the Identified Sanskrit Manuscripts in the Hoernle, Stein, and Skrine Collections of the British Library (London)’. In Paul Harrison and Jens-Uwe Hartmann eds. From Birch Bark to Digital Data: Recent Advances in Buddhist Manuscript Research. Papers Presented at the Conference, Indic Buddhist Manuscripts: The State of the Field, Stanford, June 15–19 2009 (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse Denkschriften, 460. Band; Beiträge zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte Asiens, Nr. 80), 223-246. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2014.48 Charles Willemen. ‘Guṇabhadra to Bodhidharma: The Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra and the Idea of Preaching without Words’. Pacific World: Journal of the Institute of Buddhist Studies [Third Series] 16 (2014): 19-27. Horiuchi Toshio 堀内俊郎. ‘Shikan Ryōga to Ryōga kyō’『四巻楞伽』と『楞伽経』. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 63, no. 2 (2015): 160-165. Horiuchi Toshio. ‘Toward a Critical Edition of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra: The Significance of the Palm-leaf Manuscript’. Indo ronrigaku kenkyū インド論理学研究 8 (2015): 275-286. Ishibashi Takeshi 石橋丈史. ‘Inritsu kara mita Ryōga kyō no seiritsu mondai ni tsuite’ 韻律から見た『楞伽経』の成立史問題について. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 64, no. 1 (2015): 149-152. Not exactly a paper dedicated to our text but important for the identification of Laṅkāvatārasūtra fragments from Khotan (see p. 226; cf. note 2 above). 48 42 The Laṅkāvatārasūtra: A Bibliographical Survey Horiuchi Toshio. ‘“Criticism of Heretics” Views of Nirvāṇa in the 70th Paragraph of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra: Sumiwake as Buddhist Wisdom for Multicultural Harmonious Co-existence’. Journal of International Philosophy 4 (2015), 151-158 [text in Japanese]; 331-340 [text in English]. Jia Shanshan. ‘Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. In Brill’s Encyclopedia of Buddhism, Volume I: Literature and Languages, Johnathan Silk, editor-in-chief, 138-143. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2015. Zeng Roujia 曽柔佳. ‘Ryōga kyō ni okeru ishiki no metsu’ 『楞伽経』における意識 の滅. Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 65, no. 2 (2017): 158-161. Toshio Horiuchi. ‘The Seven Bhāvasvabhāvas and Seven Paramārthas in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra: Methodological Remarks on the New Edition of Chapter II of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra’. Kokusai tetsugaku kenkyū 国際哲学研究 6 (2017): 65-84. 43