Introduction
i.1Mañjuśrī’s Teaching takes place in Śrāvastī, in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park, where the Buddha is giving a teaching to congregations of monks and bodhisattvas. Mañjuśrī emerges from the audience with a parasol and holds it over the Buddha’s head as an offering. The god Susīma, who is in the audience, asks Mañjuśrī whether he is satisfied with his offering. Mañjuśrī replies that those who seek enlightenment should never be content with making offerings to the Buddha. Susīma then asks which purpose one should keep in mind when making offerings to the Buddha. In response, Mañjuśrī lists a set of four purposes: (1) the mind of awakening, (2) liberating all sentient beings, (3) preserving unbroken the lineage of the Three Jewels, and (4) purifying the buddha realms.
i.1《文殊師利所說經》的故事發生在舍衛城的祇樹給孤獨園,佛陀正在向比丘和菩薩眾說法。文殊師利從眾中出現,手持寶蓋,將其舉在佛陀的頭上作為供養。在場的天神蘇尸摩問文殊師利是否對自己的供養感到滿足。文殊師利回答說,那些尋求菩提的人在向佛陀供養時永遠不應該感到滿足。蘇尸摩接著問應該抱著什麼目的來供養佛陀。對此,文殊師利列舉了四個目的:(1)菩提心,(2)解救所有眾生,(3)保持三寶的傳承不斷,以及(4)淨化佛國淨土。
i.2This list of the four purposes seems to be uncommon in the Buddhist tradition. Although there are a few other sets of fourfold purposes found in the Kangyur and Tengyur in various contexts, there is only one other occurrence of this list, which is found in the Catuṣkanirhārasūtra. This sūtra is interesting as it begins with a passage closely resembling Mañjuśrī’s Teaching; its setting and opening are the same and are followed by the same dialogue between Mañjuśrī and the god, although here the god’s name is Śrībhadra (dpal bzang) rather than Susīma. In the Catuṣkanirhārasūtra the four purposes are phrased in somewhat different terms but have essentially the same meaning. The sūtra is considerably longer, too, since after receiving Mañjuśrī’s reply regarding the four purposes Śrībhadra proceeds to ask a series of questions, all regarding things that are taught in sets of four.
i.2這四個目的似乎在佛教傳統中並不常見。雖然在甘珠爾和丹珠爾的各種上下文中確實存在其他幾套四重目的,但這個清單只出現過一次,就是在《四種解脫經》中。這部經非常有趣,因為它開始時有一段密切似於《文殊師利所說經》的段落;它的背景和開篇相同,隨後是文殊師利與天神之間的相同對話,只是這裡天神的名字是吉祥賢(dpal bzang)而不是蘇尸摩。在《四種解脫經》中,四個目的的措辭略有不同,但本質意義基本相同。由於這部經篇幅相當冗長,當吉祥賢收到文殊師利關於四個目的的回應後,他繼續提出一系列問題,所有問題都涉及以四為單位進行教導的事物。
i.3There was no known Sanskrit witness of Mañjuśrī’s Teaching until recently, when a manuscript containing twenty texts, all of them sūtras, was found in the Potala Palace in Lhasa. Bhikṣuṇī Vinītā published a critical edition and English translation of this collection in the series Sanskrit Texts from the Autonomous Region (2010). Unfortunately, due to the inaccessibility of the manuscript collection and because it is missing a final colophon, its origin and date are currently unknown. Citations of the Sanskrit are given using Vinītā’s emendations of the handwritten manuscript. There seems to be a thematic connection among the twenty sūtras. Vinītā gives the example of moral discipline (śīla) as a recurrent theme in the manuscript, and we also can note the prevalence of themes of karmic cause and effect and the hierarchy of merit. Interestingly, this sūtra is quoted among others, including several sūtras from the Potala manuscript, by Kawa Paltsek (ska ba dpal brtsegs, eighth century ᴄᴇ) in a text contained in the Tengyur called the gsung rab rin po che’i gtam rgyud dang shAkya’i rabs rgyud. Here we can identify the same recurrent themes among the quotations.
i.3直到最近,在拉薩布達拉宮發現了一部包含二十部經文的手稿,其中才出現了已知的《文殊師利所說經》梵文本。比丘尼維尼塔在2010年出版了這部文集的校勘本和英文譯本,納入「自治區梵文文獻」叢書。遺憾的是,由於該手稿的難以取得,以及末尾缺少跋文,其來源和年代目前仍不明確。本文引用梵文時採用維尼塔對手寫稿的校正版本。這二十部經文似乎在主題上存在關聯。維尼塔舉了道德戒律作為該手稿中反覆出現的主題例子,我們也可以觀察到業因果報和功德等級等主題的普遍存在。有趣的是,這部經文與其他經文一起被八世紀的喀瓦貝尊引用,其中包括多部布達拉宮手稿中的經文,出現在丹珠爾所收的一部著作中。通過這部著作,我們可以識別這些引文中相同的反覆出現的主題。
i.4There is no Chinese translation of this sūtra, but there is a Chinese translation of the Catuṣkanirhārasūtra, which, as mentioned above, has an opening passage that closely parallels that of Mañjuśrī’s Teaching. This Chinese version of the Catuṣkanirhāra was translated by Śikṣānanda between 695–700 ᴄᴇ.
i.4這部經沒有中文譯本,但《四無畏經》有中文譯本。如上所述,《四無畏經》的開篇段落與《文殊師利所說經》密切相似。《四無畏經》的中文譯本是由實叉難陀在西元695至700年間翻譯的。
i.5According to the Tibetan translators’ colophon, Mañjuśrī’s Teaching was translated into Tibetan by the Indian preceptor Surendrabodhi and the Tibetan translator Yeshé Dé, who were active during the late eighth–early ninth centuries ᴄᴇ. The Denkarma and Phangthangma imperial catalogs, which are dated to the early ninth century, both list Mañjuśrī’s Teaching among their inventories of sūtras.
i.5根據藏文譯者的後記,《文殊師利所說經》是由印度論師蘇仁底菩提和藏文譯者智慧光在公元八世紀末至九世紀初期間合作翻譯成藏文的。《丹噶目錄》和《昂仁目錄》這兩部皇帝編纂的目錄都成書於公元九世紀初期,兩部目錄中都將《文殊師利所說經》列入其經典藏書之中。
i.6We have based our translation on the Degé edition of the Tibetan Kangyur in consultation with the Sanskrit and other Kangyur editions, and compared this scripture to the parallel section found in both the Tibetan and Chinese versions of the Catuṣkanirhārasūtra. These various Tibetan witnesses, along with the Sanskrit, are generally consistent. Any instance in which we have diverged from the Degé has been noted, and significant differences found in the various versions of the sūtra are recorded in the notes.
i.6我們的翻譯以德格版藏文甘珠爾為基礎,並參考了梵文及其他甘珠爾版本,同時將此經文與藏文和漢文版《四法無畏經》中的相應段落進行比較。這些藏文證本及梵文在內容上基本一致。凡是我們偏離德格版之處均已註明,而各版本經文中發現的重大差異已在註釋中記錄。