Introduction

i.1In The Devatā Sūtra, a radiant divine being (Skt. devatā, Tib. lha) appears before the Buddha one night shortly before dawn and, in a series of verses, asks the Buddha questions about how to live, success and failure, the pursuit of happiness, and liberation. The Buddha’s simple and direct responses to these enduring questions present an eloquent introduction to the core ethical values of Buddhism and a concise guide to daily life. The sūtra is extant in many manuscripts from the first millennium ᴄᴇ, in Sanskrit, Chinese, and Tibetan.

i.1在《天神經》中，一位光輝燦爛的天神（梵語：devatā，藏語：lha）在黎明前的夜間出現在佛陀面前，以一系列的詩偈向佛陀提出關於如何生活、成功與失敗、追求幸福和解脫的問題。佛陀對這些永恆問題的簡潔而直接的回答，為佛教的核心倫理價值提供了一個深刻的介紹，也是日常生活的簡明指南。這部經典以多種手稿形式流傳至今，距今約一千多年前，存在於梵文、漢文和藏文的版本中。

i.2There are two Sanskrit witnesses. A full version of the sūtra, which matches the Tibetan translation quite closely, is included among the Gilgit Buddhist manuscripts discovered in 1931 in present-day northern Pakistan. Written in the proto-Śāradā script, the manuscript is dated between the sixth to eighth centuries ᴄᴇ. Sanskrit editions of the sūtra that are based on this manuscript have been published by two contemporary scholars. The sūtra is also included as one of the twenty sūtras in an undated Sanskrit manuscript written in the Dhārikā script and preserved in the Potala Palace, Lhasa. A comparative critical edition based on this manuscript, which also presents the parallel Tibetan and Chinese texts along with an English translation, has been published by Bhikṣuṇī Vinītā. While the Gilgit manuscript corresponds quite closely in length and content to the Tibetan translation found in the Kangyur, the Potala Palace Sanskrit manuscript contains five additional ślokas at the beginning and two ślokas toward the end that are not found in the Tibetan.

i.2現存有兩份梵文文本。一份完整版本的經文在1931年於現今巴基斯坦北部發現的吉爾吉特佛教手稿中被發現，其內容與藏文譯本相當接近。這份手稿採用原始野羅達文字書寫，年代介於西元六到八世紀之間。根據這份手稿出版的梵文版本已由兩位當代學者發表。這部經文也被納入保存在拉薩布達拉宮的一份未標年代的梵文手稿中，作為二十部經文之一，該手稿採用德哈里卡文字書寫。比丘尼毗尼塔發表了基於這份手稿的比較性批判版本，同時呈現了相應的藏文和中文文本以及英文翻譯。雖然吉爾吉特手稿在篇幅和內容上與大藏經中的藏文譯本相當接近，但布達拉宮梵文手稿開頭另包含五首偈頌，結尾還有兩首偈頌，而這些在藏文版本中都找不到。

i.3A Chinese translation of The Devatā Sūtra was completed by Xuanzang in 648 ᴄᴇ and is included in the Chinese canon (Taishō 592). It is slightly shorter than both the Tibetan and Sanskrit witnesses. Over twenty manuscripts containing the sūtra in Chinese are among the manuscripts retrieved from the cave library at Dunhuang, and many illustrations of the sūtra have been identified among the murals of the cave complex there.

i.3玄奘在西元648年完成了《天神經》的漢文翻譯，並收入漢文大藏經（大正592）中。這個版本比藏文和梵文的版本都略短。從敦煌石窟藏書洞中發現的文獻中，有超過二十份包含漢文《天神經》的古籍，而且在那裡的石窟壁畫中也發現了許多該經的插圖。

i.4The Tibetan translation of The Devatā Sūtra has no colophon, making its translation history uncertain. However, in both the Denkarma (ldan dkar ma) and Phangthangma (’phang thang ma) imperial catalogs, it is listed among translated “Hīnayāna” (Tib. theg pa chung ngu) sūtras, so its translation into Tibetan was no later than the early ninth century ᴄᴇ. An attribution to the great translator Yeshé Dé has been suggested, based on the listing in Butön’s History of Buddhism. However, that citation may just refers to The Shorter Devatā Sūtra (Toh 330), which immediately follows it in Kangyur collections. Jonathan Silk has listed The Devatā Sūtra among “questionable cases” that may have been translated into Tibetan from Chinese. There is a close correspondence between the Tibetan and Chinese in the opening narrative, and in the first seven exchanges (or fourteen verses) in the latter part of the sūtra. However, the Tibetan and Chinese also diverge, and the Tibetan contains two exchanges (exchanges 8 and 10 below) that are not found in the Chinese at all but are found in the extant Sanskrit witnesses. This indicates that a translation from Sanskrit (or perhaps from both languages) is more likely. In Sanskrit, each verse consists of two sixteen-syllable lines. The Tibetan is presented in four-line verses (each consisting of two couplets) of seven-syllable lines.

i.4《天神經》的藏文譯本沒有譯者記載，因此其譯經歷史不甚清楚。然而，在《丹噶目錄》和《帕當瑪目錄》這兩份皇帝時期的目錄中，它被列在被譯為藏文的「小乘」經典之中，所以其藏文譯本的完成時間不晚於公元九世紀初期。根據布頓的《佛教史》中的記載，有人推測這部經是由偉大的譯師智慧光翻譯的。然而，這個引述可能只是指緊跟其後的《較短天神經》（Toh 330），該經在大藏經的藏文版中緊接在《天神經》之後。喬納森·賽爾克將《天神經》列為「存疑之作」，可能是從漢文譯成藏文的。藏文與漢文在開篇故事和經後半部分的前七段對話（或十四首偈頌）中有密切的對應關係。然而，藏文與漢文也存在差異，藏文中包含了兩段對話（下文所述的第八段和第十段對話），在漢文版本中完全沒有出現，但在現存的梵文原文中卻有。這表明該經更可能是從梵文翻譯的，或者可能同時參考了梵文和漢文兩種語言進行翻譯。在梵文中，每一首偈頌由兩行十六音節的句子組成。藏文版本呈現為四行偈頌的形式，每行由七個音節組成。

i.5Two short suttas entitled Devatāsutta contained in the Aṅguttara Nikāya of the Pali canon (AN 9.19 and AN 6.69) do not correspond in content to this text.

i.5巴利三藏增支部中有兩部稱為《天神經》的短經文（增支部9.19和6.69），其內容與本文不相應。

i.6The versions of the sūtra found in Kangyurs of the Tshalpa line are largely in agreement and contain only minor orthographic variation. The versions in Kangyurs of the Thempangma line, however, display more significant variation. The Stok Palace Kangyur version, for example, gives the Sanskrit title as Devasūtra and presents the verses and their contents in a different order.

i.6札卓巴傳承的大藏經中所見的經文版本基本一致，只有細微的拼寫差異。但是德彭瑪傳承的大藏經中的版本則顯現出更為顯著的差異。例如，托布宮版大藏經將梵文標題記為《天神經》，並以不同的順序呈現了經文和其內容。

i.7The sūtra is found in three Tibetan manuscripts retrieved from the cave library at Dunhuang, Pelliot tibétain 103, 731, and 732. These versions display considerable variation, indicative of their compilation prior to the creation of a Tibetan canon. While the Kangyur versions of the sūtra, like the Gilgit manuscript, have no parallel for the first five verses found in the Sanskrit Potala Palace manuscript, Pelliot tibétain 731 has versions of two of these extra opening verses. Pelliot tibétain 732, in which the sūtra’s title is given as lhas gsold pa’i mdo, presents an alternative version with a number of interesting features, some of which, according to Bhikṣuṇī Vinītā, find parallel in the Gondlha manuscript version.

i.7該經文在敦煌石窟藏書庫中發現的三份藏文手稿中出現，分別為伯希和藏文103、731和732號。這些版本顯示出相當大的差異，說明它們是在藏文大藏經編纂之前編纂的。雖然該經的大藏經版本與吉爾吉特手稿一樣，對於梵文布達拉宮手稿中發現的前五偈頌沒有平行文本，但伯希和藏文731號中包含其中兩首額外開篇偈頌的版本。伯希和藏文732號中，該經的標題被譯為「天神經」，呈現了一個另外的版本，具有許多有趣的特點，其中一些根據比丘尼毗尼陀所述，在貢德拉手稿版本中有相應的平行內容。

i.8One exchange in particular from the sūtra continues to be well known and frequently quoted:

i.8特別是其中一段對話，至今仍在這部經典中廣為人知，頻繁被引用：

“The divine being asked:

「天神問道：

“ ‘What is attractive but not beneficial,

「什麼是有吸引力但沒有益處的，

And what is beneficial but not attractive?

什麼是有益但沒有吸引力的呢？

What is a harmful disease,

什麼是有害的疾病，

And who, the supreme physician?’

誰是最高的醫生？』

“The Blessed One replied:

薄伽梵回答說：

“ ‘Lust is attractive but not beneficial,

「貪欲吸引人心但不利益人，

And liberation is beneficial but not attractive.

解脫是有益的，但卻不令人著迷。

Attachment is a harmful disease,

執著是一種有害的疾病，

And the Buddha is the supreme physician.’ ”

佛陀是最高的醫生。」」

i.11An early English translation of the sūtra from Chinese was published by Carus (1894). This English translation was made from the Tibetan text as found in the Degé Kangyur, with reference to the Tibetan variants recorded in the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma), the Stok Palace Kangyur, and the Tibetan Dunhuang manuscripts. The Sanskrit was also consulted. Where significant alternative readings have been identified, this has been recorded in the notes.

i.11早期由卡魯斯（1894年）從漢文出版的經文英譯本。本英譯本以德格版大藏經中的藏文本為基礎翻譯，並參考了《對照版大藏經》（dpe bsdur ma）記載的藏文異本、托布宮版大藏經以及敦煌藏文手稿。梵文本也曾作為參考。凡發現重要的異文，均已在註釋中予以記錄。