the tibetan canon which consists of two parts

7/30/2019 The Tibetan Canon Which Consists of Two Parts

1/6

The Tibetan Canon which consists of two parts: (1) the bKngjur ("Translation of the Word ofthe Buddha"), pronounced Kanjur, and (2) the bStan-'gyur ("Translations of the Teachings")pronounced Tanjur. Because this latter collection contains works attributed to individuals other

than the Buddha, it is considered only semi-canonical. The first printing of the Kanjur occurrednot in Tibet, but in China (Beijing), being completed in 1411. The first Tibetan edition of thecanon was at sNar-tang with the Kanjur appearing in 1731, followed by the Tanjur in 1742.Other famous editions of the canon were printed at Derge and Co-ne.

(a) bKngjur(Kanjur): Translation of the Word of the Buddha; 98 Volumes (according to theNarthang edition).

1. Vinaya: 13 Volumes.2. Prajnaparamita: 21 Volumes.3. Avatamsaka: 6 Volumes.4.

Ratnakuta: 6 Volumes.

5. Sutra: 30 Volumes. 270 texts, 75% of which are Mahayana, 25% Hinayana (prominenceand precedence being invariably given to Mahayana sutras).

6. Tantra: 22 Volumes. Contains more than 300 texts.

The second, the Tanjur (bStan-'gyur) is a supplement to the former, or in other words,continuation of the tradition of the Kanjur. Among its contents are a collection of stories, thecommentaries on the Tantra section of the Kanjur and the commentaries on the sutra section.There are also works relating to Abhidharma and Vinaya as well as Madhyamika andVijnanavada. Works coming under the sutra section of the Tanjur are not necessarilycommentaries on the texts contained in the Mdo-section of the Kanjur. They are believed to beauthoritative works, some of which, however, are not even Buddhist in character. They deal withlogic, grammar, lexicography, poetry and drama, medicine and chemistry, astrology and

divination, painting and biographies of saints. Their inclusion in this part of the Tibetan Canon isperhaps justified on the acceptance of the position that they are necessary aids andaccompaniments in the practice of the religion.

(b)bStan-'gyur(Tanjur): Translations of the Teachings 224 Volumes (3626 texts) accordingto the Beijing edition.

A. Sutras ("Hymns of Praise"): 1 Volume; 64 texts.B. Commentaries on the Tantras: 86 Volumes; 3055 texts.C. Commentaries on Sutras; 137 Volumes; 567 texts.

1. Prajnaparamita Commentaries, 16 Volumes.2. Madhyamika Treatises, 29 Volumes.3. Yogacara Treatises, 29 Volumes.4. Abhidharma, 8 Volumes.5. Miscellaneous Texts, 4 Volumes.6. Vinaya Commentaries, 16 Volumes.7. Tales and Dramas, 4 Volumes.8. Technical Treatises, 43 Volumes.


2/6

The Chinese Canon is called the Ta-ts'ang-chingor "Great Scripture Store." The first completeprinting of the "Three Baskets" orTripitaka was completed in 983 C.E., and known as the Shu-

pen or Szechuan edition. It included 1076 texts in 480 cases. A number of other editions of themodern Chinese Canon were made thereafter. The now standard modern edition of this work isknown as the Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo, published in Tokyo between 1924 and 1929. It contains55 volumes containing 2184 texts, along with a supplement of 45 additional volumes. A fine

chapter titled "The Chinese Tripitaka" can be found on pp. 365-368 ofBuddhism in China(Princeton University Press), 1964 by Kenneth K.S. Ch'en.

The Chinese Tripitaka in World Buddhism

The main objective of the World Buddhist Fellowship is to link the various schools of Buddhism,coming as they do from all over the world. This communion can be accomplished byharmonious cooperation on the basis of spiritual sharing. As a global community we can thenactualize the inspiring ideals of world enlightenment and salvation through the encouragementof our common Buddhist culture.

We must first acknowledge that the various schools of thought in Buddhism are indeed facets of

the Triple Gem that is Buddhism. There is no room for superficial and dogmatic claims that oneschool is true whereas others are not. For instance the Mahayana schools should not be lightlydismissed as illegitimate, nor should the Sravakavana school conversely be despised asmoribund. Only when the study and practice of Buddhism is carried out in a friendly andaccommodating atmosphere, with mutual trust and understanding, will coordination andcooperation be possible. With this attitude, the trash and trimmings now enshrouding Buddhismcan be removed to reveal the essential splendour of the Triple Gem. Thus Buddhism, which iswell-adapted to this modern world, can be redeemed and developed for the purpose of theenlightenment and salvation of the world in its dire present need.

Buddhism stems from one point of origin and is highly adaptable under many circumstances.For different races, time and environments, it seems to develop into entirely different shapesand forms. But a close study of its trends and modes of development, its adaptations to new

environments whilst preserving the integral identity of its core, brings one to the realisation thatthe different forms of Buddhism are interrelated and that cooperation amongst them is entirelyfeasible. Generally, each school has its own characteristics and shortcomings. Buddhists shouldhonestly survey these various schools, exchanging the shortcomings in each for the strengths inothers on the basis of equality, and for the sake of pursuing truth. In so doing, the ultimate truthas experienced by the Buddha may be realized and his original intention, as embodied in histeaching, may be fully understood.

When we trace the different schools of Buddhism in the world today, from their origins in India,we can see that the profile sprouting of sectarian Buddhism seems to have taken place asfollows:

(1) The sacred texts embodying the Buddha-dharma developed over time. The sutras andVinaya Pitaka were the earliest to be compiled and circulated. Round about the beginning of thefirst century A.D., the researchers of the Agama Sutra and those dedicated to Sravaka practicehad compiled the Abhidharma, emphasising the existential aspect of Dependent Origination. Onthe other hand, the Mahayana scriptures had been compiled by those who stressed the virtuesof the Buddha and the practice of the Bodhisattva, emphasizing the aspect of emptiness ascentral to the attainment of real understanding of Dependent Origination.

By the third century A.D., Nagarjuna had composed his famous Sastras on the Madhyamikadoctrine interpreting the Agama and Abhidharma on the basis of the Mahayana sutras of theSunyata school. At about the same time, Mahayana scriptures tending towards 'eternal-reality'idealism, such as the Srimaladeve-Simhanada Sutra and the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, hadbegun to be found, followed by sutras such as the Lankavatara Sutra. Along with this

development, the Asters and Yogacaryas of the Sravastivada school accepted the "mind-only"aspect of the Mahayana school. They compiled a number of Sastras of the YogacaraVijnanavada and eventually flourished as a great Mahayana school in their own right.


3/6

Then, at about the fifth century there was a further development of esoteric Yoga from theschool of eternal-reality idealism. If one tried to follow the course of development of Buddhismas outlined above, one would have no difficulty tracing the evolution of the vast diversity ofscriptures and doctrines held sacred by the many schools.

(2) Doctrinally, Buddhism was just Buddhism at first and there was no sectarian difference. It did

not divide into the Sravakayana and Bodhisattvayana until about the beginning of the Christianera. Then in the scriptures of the Bodhisattvayana we begin to see the division of Hinayana andMahayana.

In the second and third centuries scriptures of eternal-reality idealism started to appear in theBodhisattvayana. In such Sutras were first seen the terms "noumenon, Sunya and Madhya";and "Hina-, Maha- and Eka-yana." These scriptures of later date laid special emphasis on theachievement of Buddhahood, and were thus also classified as Buddhayana.

At the beginning of the fifth century, another 'yana', the Dharaniyana, sprung into existence fromthe noumenal school of Buddhism. This school classified all Buddha Dharma into the Tripitaka,the Paramita Pitaka (including everything of the exoteric schools), and the Dharani Pitaka. Italso categorised the Dharma according to practice as: Catvri-satyani, Paramita, and greed-ingrained.

These classifications are indicative of the diversification and development of Buddhism and areconsistent with the schematic three periods of historical development proposed by the lateVenerable Tai Hsu. The latter were as follows:

First 500 years after Buddha's demise - Hinayana in vogue with Mahayana in the background.The Pali Tipitaka are representative of the Buddhism of this period.

Second 500 years - Mahayana to the fore with Hinayana attendant. The Chinese Tripitakareflects the development of Buddhism in this period.

Third 500 years - Tantric Buddhism took the lead, leaving the exoteric school in its wake. TheTibetan Tripitaka is the fruit of this period.

Chinese Buddhism - from which Japanese Buddhism derives is representative of the Buddhismof the second 500 years, i.e. it is founded mainly on Bodhisattvayana, which links the earlierSravakayana and the later Buddhayana. It therefore effectively ties Buddhist history together.

As it plays such a pivotal role in the historical development of the Buddha-dharma, the ChineseTripitaka deserves the special attention of all those concerned with the present development ofworld Buddhism. It is my humble opinion that only in the study of the Chinese Tripitaka can thecontents of Buddhism be fully and totally understood. The Chinese Tripitaka offers the following:

(a) Agamas: All four Agamas belong to the Bhava division. The Madhyamagama andSamyuktagama were translated from the texts of the Sravastivada school while the Dirghagamaand Ekottaragama were translated from those of the Mahasamghika or Vibbajyavada schools.Though admittedly it does not contain a complete set of the sutras of any single school, (the PaliTripitaka does present a more complete set), a textual conglomeration of many schools doeshave its merits (The Tibetan Tripitaka contains no Agama at all).

(b) Vinayas: The Tibetan Tripitaka contains only the new rules of the Tamrasatiya sect, whilethe Chinese Vinaya contains all the following:

(i) The Mahasamghika Vinaya of the Mahasamghika school.

(ii) The five divisions of the Mahisasaka Vinaya, the four divisions of the Dharmagupta Vinaya,the pratimoksa of Mahadasyapiyah, and the Sudarsana Vinaya of Tamrasatiya. All these arerules of the Vibbajyavada school.


4/6

(iii) The old Sravastivada Vinaya and the new Mulasarvasti vadanikaya Vinaya, both of theSarvastivada school.

(iv) The Twenty-Two-Points-Of-Elucidation Sastras of the Sammatiya sect of the Vatsiputriyasschool.

This rich collection of materials from different sources greatly facilitates comparative studies ofsectarian Buddhism.

(c) Abhidharmas: This body of scripture is common to the three main schools of TheravadaBuddhism, namely, the Vibhajyavadins, the Sarvastivadins, and the Vatsiputriyas. In the TibetanTripitaka there are only the Prajnapti of the Jnanaaprasthanasatpadabhidharma and the later

Abhidarmakosa.

The Pali Tripitaka contains seven Sastras. While the Chinese Tripitaka has an especially largecollection of the work of the Sarvastivada school, it also possesses the Abhidharma work ofpractically all sects. The Chinese Tripitaka contains:

i) The Samgitiparyaya, the Dharmaskandha, the Prajnapti, the Vijnanakaya, the Dhatukaya, thePrakaranapada, the Jnanaprasthana, the Mahavibhasa, the Abhidharma-hrdaya-vyakhya, the

Abhiraharmananyanyanusara and the Abhidharmasamayapradipika Sastras of the Sarvastivadaschool.

ii) Of the works of Vibhajyavadins, it includes the Abhidharma Sastra of Sariputa, which is theonly important work that links up the Southern and Northern Abhidharmas.

iii) It also contains the Vimmuttimagga which is a different version of the Pali Visuddhimagga.

iv) It further contains the Sammitiya Sastra of the Vatsiputriya School.

v) The renowned Abhidharmakosa of the third to fourth century which combines the bestteachings of the Sarvastivada and Sautrantika schools, and the Satyasiddi Sastra ofHarivarman which greatly influenced Chinese Buddhism.

All these treasures of the Abhidharma may be found in the Chinese Tripitaka. It can thus beseen that although the works of earlier dates in the Tripitaka were not given the full respect duethem by the majority of Chinese Buddhists, the wealth of information they contain will be ofgreat reference value to anyone interested in tracing the divisions of the Sravaka schools andthe development of the Bodhisattva ideal from the Sravakayana. If these scriptures are ignored,I will say that it would definitely not be possible for anyone to fulfil the responsibility ofcoordinating and linking the many branches of world Buddhism.

(d) Mahayana scriptures of the Sunyavada.

(e) Mahayana scriptures of the noumenon school, or the school of eternal-reality, are verycomplete in the Chinese Tripitaka. These scriptures are very similar to those found in theTibetan Tripitaka. The four great Sutras, the Prajnaparamita, the Avatamsaka, theMahasamghata, and the Mahaparinirvana (to which may be added the Maharatnakuta Sutra,making five great sutras), are all tremendously voluminous works. Here it may be pointed outthat the Chinese scriptures are particularly notable for the following characteristics:

(i) The different translations of the same Sutra have been safely preserved in the ChineseTripitaka in their respective original versions without their being constantly revised according tolater translations, as was the case with Tibetan scriptures. From a study of the Chinesetranslations we can thus trace the changes in content which the majority of scriptures have

undergone over time and reflect upon the changes in the original Indian texts at different pointsin time. Thus we have the benefit of more than one version for reference, recording theevolution of the scriptures.


5/6

(ii) The Chinese Mahayana scriptures that were translated before the Tsin Dynasties (beginning265 C.E.) are particularly related to the Buddhism of Chinese Turkestan with its centre in themountain areas of Kashmir. These scriptures form a strong nucleus of Chinese Buddhistthinking. The translations of the Dasabhumika Sastra and Lankavatara Sutra all possess veryspecial characteristics.

(f) Madhyamika: The Madhyamika texts of the Chinese Tripitaka are considerably different fromthe Tibetan renditions of the same system of thought. The Chinese collection consists mostly ofearlier works, particularly those of Nagarjuna, such as the Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra and theDasabhumikavibhasa Sastra, which not only present Madhyamika philosophy of a very highorder but also illustrate extensively the acts of a Bodhisattva.

Of the late Madhyamika works, i.e. works produced by the disciples of Nagarjuna after the riseof the Yogacara system, only the Prajnapradipa Sastra of Bhavaviveka has been rendered intoChinese. The Chinese Tripitaka does not contain works or as many schools of this system asthe Tibetan Tripitaka. The Mahayanavataraka Sastra of Saramati and the Madhyayata Sastra of

Asanga clearly indicate the change of thinking from the Madhyamika to the Yogacara system.

(g) Yogacara-Vijnanavada: The Chinese Tripitaka contains a very complete collection of thissystem of thought. It includes important scriptures such as the Dasabhumika,Mahayanasamparigraha Sastra, and Vijnaptimatrasiddhi Sastra. While the Tibetan system wasmainly founded on the teachings of Sthiramati which are more akin to theMahayanasamparigraha school of Chinese work, the Chinese students of orthodox Vijnanavadafollow the teachings of Dharmapala.

The Vinaptimatrasiddhi Sastra, which represents the consummation of the Dignaga-Dharmapala-Silabhadra school of thought, is a gem of the Chinese Tripitaka. The Hetuvidyawhich is closely connected with Vijnanavada, is not fully translated in the Chinese Tripitaka andcannot compare favourably with the works of Dignaga and Dharmakirti collected in the TibetanTripitaka.

This seems to indicate that the Chinese people were not logically inclined, and gives no weightto engagements in verbal gymnastics and debates. In times past this had relegated the positionof Sastra masters in China to one of relative unimportance.

(h) The esoteric Yoga: The Chinese Tripitaka includes Chinese translations of both theVairocana Sutra of the practical division, and the Diamond Crown Sutra of the Yoga division ofthe Tantric school of Buddhism. The only esoteric scriptures that are missing are those of theSupreme Yoga division which, as they arrived in China at a time of national chaos, did not havemuch chance to circulate widely. Its very nature of achieving enlightenment through carnalexpressions also made Tantrism unacceptable to the Chinese intellectuals. However, the textsof esoteric Yoga are abundant in the Tibetan Tripitaka.

From the above it can be seen that the Chinese Tripitaka is composed mainly of Mahayanascriptures of the second 500 years, yet translations were not restricted to scriptures of thismiddle period. The Chinese Tripitaka also possesses a wealth of works of early Buddhism as agood portion of the later productions.

Thus, if one could have a sufficient knowledge of the Chinese Tripitaka, and could extend hisknowledge from there to include the Pali Tripitaka of the Sravakayana, and the Madhyamikaand Supreme Yoga of the Tibetan system, then he would have little difficulty in gaining anaccurate, complete and comprehensive panorama of the 1,700 years of development of IndianBuddhism, the record of which has been preserved in the three great extant schools of Buddhistthought.

The late Venerable Tai Hsu once said, "To mold a new, critical and comprehensive system,

based on the Chinese Tripitaka, the Theravada teaching of Ceylon, and selected components ofthe Tibetan canon, should be the objective of the writing of a history of Indian Buddhism." Even


6/6

more so, it should be the objective of coordinating and connecting the many tributaries of worldBuddhism. It is our responsibility to discard the trimmings and to retain the very essence of thegreat Tripitakas, adapting Buddhism to the modern world so that it may fulfil its mission ofleading the way, taking under its wings the miserable beings of the present era.

Translated by Mok Chung, edited by Mick Kiddle, proofread by Neng Rong. (20-6-1995)

the tibetan canon which consists of two parts

Documents