Article
Article name	Features of Formation of the Buddhist Canon in Tibet and China: a Comparative Analysis
Authors	Urbanaeva I.S. Doctor of Philosophy, Leading Researcher, urbanaeva@imbt.ru
Bibliographic description
Section	ORIENTAL STUDIES
UDK	571.54
DOI
Article type
Annotation	The article presents a comparative analysis of some important aspects of the formation of two Mahayana Buddhist canons (Tibetan Kangyr and Tengyurand Chinese canon and Tibet). The author develops the hypothesis that the Buddhist canon in Tibet was formed based on conscious public and scientific strategy of dissemination of authentic Buddhismin Tibet, which was aimed at obtaining pure oral transmission of the Dharma from India. According to this strategy, a special language of Tibetan Buddhist tradition was created in Tibet, principles of selection and interpretation of Sanskrit texts were developed, and an extensive system of Buddhist categories was created. Under the patronage of kings, in cooperation of Tibetan translators and Indian panditas two collections of texts, bKa’-‘gyur and bsTan-’gyur, were created. These canonical texts were not only Scripture like the Bible or an ancient monument of literary culture like canon Dazangjing for the Chinese. They served as the textual basis for oral transmission of the Dharma and were perceived on the whole as a system of spiritual practice for anyone who aspired to Enlightenment. In China, there was no proper strategy for the formation of Buddhist canonical corpus and authenticity criteria. Due to the specific of the Chinese civilization, Buddhist canon was formed here as a way of cataloging the vast diversity of texts, and, in contrast to the Tibetan one, was used only partly in the Buddhist practice. The author lists eight characteristics of Tibetan strategy that distinguished the formation of the Buddhist canon in Tibet from the similar process in China.
Key words	Buddhist Canon, Kangyur, Tengyur, Dazangjing, lotsawa, pandita, Tibet, China, India, authentic tradition, Buton Rinchen Drub, Kaba Palrseg, translation strategy
Article information
References	1. Bolsokhoeva N. D. Ganchzhur Sikkimskogo izdaniya // Srednevekovaya kul’tura Tsentral’noi Azii: pis’mennye istochniki. Ulan-Ude: BNTs SO RAN, 1995. S. 108–119. 2. Budon Rinchendub. Istoriya buddizma. SPb.: Evraziya, 1999. 336 s. 3. Vostrikov A. I. Tibetskaya istoricheskaya literatura (Bibliotheca Buddhica XXXII). M.: Vost. lit., 1962. 428 s. 4. Kychanov E. I., Mel’nichenko B. I. Istoriya Tibeta s drevneishikh vremen do nashikh dnei. M.: Vost. lit. RAN, 2005. 233 s. 5. Malanova T. M. Tibetskii kanon Ganchzhur i Danchzhur kak dvizhushchayasya sistema tekstov // Istochnikovedenie i tekstologiya pamyatnikov srednevekovykh nauk v stranakh Tsentral’noi Azii. Novosibirsk, 1989. S. 251–259. 6. Pabongka Rinpoche. Lamrim: Osvobozhdenie v nashikh rukakh (Lam rim rnam grol lag bcangs). Ulan-Ude: BNTs SO RAN, 2008. T. 1. Kn. 1. 192 s. 7. Torchinov E. A. Vvedenie v buddologiyu: kurs lektsii. SPb.: S-Peterb. filos. o-vo, 2000. 304 s. 8. Urbanaeva I. S. Buddiiskaya filosofiya i meditatsiya v komparativistskom kontekste (na osnove indotibetskikh tekstov i zhivoi traditsii tibetskogo buddizma). Ulan-Ude: IMBT SO RAN, 2014. 376 s. 9. Chebunin A. V. Istoriya proniknoveniya i stanovleniya buddizma v Kitae. Ulan-Ude: VSGAKI, 2009. 278 s. 10. Shonnupel Goi-lotsava. Sinyaya letopis’. Deb-ther sNgon-po. Istoriya buddizma v Tibete. VI–XV vv. SPb.: Evraziya, 2001. 623 s. 11. Badaraev B.-D. Note on a list of the various Editions of the Kanjur // Acta Orientalia Hungarica.1968. T. 21.F. 3. P. 345–346. 12. Chattopadhyaya A. Atīśa and Tibet. Repr. Delhi; Varanasi [etc.]. M. Banarsiddas, 1996. 593 p. 13. Chen Kenneth K. S. Buddhism in China: Historical Survey. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972. 576 p. 14. Eimer H. Some Results of Resent Kanjur Research // Archiv für Zentralasiatischen Geschichtsforschung. Heft 1–6, 1983. P. 3–21. 15. Eimer H. & Germano D. & Blezer H. W. A. (eds.). The Many Canons of Tibetan Buddhism. Leiden: Brill, 2002. P. 357. 16. Hairman A. Vinaya: from India to China // The Spread of Buddhism. Brill: Leiden; Boston, 2012. P. 167–202. 17. Heirman A. and Bumbacher S. P. (eds.). The Spread of Buddhism. Brill: Leiden; Boston, 2012. P. 474. 18. Ishikawa Yumiko & Fukuda Yoichi (eds.). A New Critical Edition of the Mahāvyutpatti. Sanscrit-Tibetan Mongolian Dictionary of Buddhist Terminology. Tokyo // Studia Tibetica 16, Materials for Tibetan-Mongolian Dictionaries. 1989. Vol. 1. 19. Kaba Paltseg. Chos kyi rnam grangs kyi brjed byang // Peking Tenjur. № 5849. 20. Kaba Paltseg. Chos kyi rnam grangs // Peking Tenjur. № 5850. 21. Kaba Paltseg. A Manual of Key Buddhist Terms: A Categorization of Buddhist Terminology with Commentary. Dharamsala: LTWA, 1992. P. 69. 22. Kapstein M. T. Reason’s Traces. Identity and Interpretation in Indian and Tibetan Buddhist Thougt. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2001. 473 p. 23. Lancaster L. The Movement of Buddhist Texts from India to Chine and the Construction of the Chinese Buddhist Canon // Buddhism Across Boundaries, Sino-Platonic Papers. March, 2012. № 222. P. 226–260. 24. Mair V. H. The Khotanese Antecedentsof the Sutra of the Wise and the Foolish (Xianyu jing) // Buddhism Across Boundaries, Sino-Platonic Papers. March, 2012. № 222. P. 150–178. 25. McRae John R. and Nattier Jan (eds.). Buddhism Across Boundaries – Chinese Buddhism and the Western Regions: Collection of Essays 1993. First Published in 1999 Foguang Cultural Enterprise Co., LTD, Taiwan. 1–59. 26. McRae, John R. and Nattier, Jan (eds.). No Buddhism across boundaries: The Interplay of Indian, Chinese and Central Asian Source Materials // Sino-Platonic Papers. March, 2012. № 222. P. 260. 27. Raine R. Translating the Tibetan Buddhist Canon: Past Strategies, Future Prospects [Электронный ресурс]. Режим доступа: http://www.academia.edu/3987419/Translating_the_Tibetan_Buddhist_canon_Past_ strategies_future_prospects (дата обращения: 04.08.2015). 28. Pagel Ulrich. The Dhārāàīs of Mahāvyutpatti #748: Origin and Formation // Buddhist Studies Review. 2007. № 24(2). P. 151–191. 29. Sakaki R. Mahāvyutpatti /Honyaku meigi daishū. Bonzō Kanwa. Chibetto yaku-taikō, 2 vols. Kyōto: Suzuli Research Foundation. Originally published Tokyo: Shingonshū Kyōto Daigaku, 1925; Sanskrit index compilied by Kyōo Nishio, 1936, 1962. 30. Sárközi A. (ed.). A Buddhist Terminological Dictionary: The Mongolian Mahāvyutpatti. Asiatische Forschungen 130. Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz, 1995. P. 836. 31. Schaeffer K. R. & van der Kuijp L. W. J. An Early Tibetan Survey of Buddhist Literature. Boston: Harvard University Press, 2009. 276 p. 32. Schaeffer Kurtis R. A Letter to the Editors of the Buddhist Canon in Fourteenth-Century Tibet: The Yig mkhan rnams la gdams pa of Bu ston Rin chen grub // Journal of American Oriental Society. 2004. № 124.2. P. 265–281. 33. Shastri L. The Transmission of Buddhist Canonical Literature in Tibet // Tibet Journal. 2007. № 32. P. 23–47. 34. Storch T. Chinese Buddhist Historiography and Orality // Sino-Platonic Papers. 1993. № 37. P. 1–16. 35. Tsepag Ngawang. Tibetan literature survey and trends. Hamburg, 2005. 36. Zürcher E. The Buddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaptation of Buddhism in Early Medieval China. Third Edition. Leden: Brill, 2007. P. 472. 37. Zürcher E. Buddhism Across Boundaries: The Foreign Input // Sino-Platonic Papers. March, 2012. № 222. P. 1–25. 38. Wedemeyer, C. K. Pseudepigrapha in the Tibetan Buddhist ‘Canonical Collections’: The Case of the Caryāmelāpakapradīpa Commentary Attributed to Śākyamitra // Journal of the International Association of Tibetan Studies. December, 2009. № 5. P. 1–31. 39. Weirong S. and Shiu H. Editor’s Preface // Raymond E. Robertson. A study of the Dharmadharmathavibhanga: The root text and its scriptural source (the Avikalpapravesadharani), with excerpts from Kamalasila’s Avikalpapravesadharanitika. Monograph series in Sino-Tibetan Buddhist studies. Beijing: China Tibetology publishing house, 2007. Vol. 1. P. 1–8.
Full article	Features of Formation of the Buddhist Canon in Tibet and China: a Comparative Analysis
	0
	15