In this work, after a careful scientific investigation of the Hinayana Schools of Buddhism and their texts, particularly through the determination of a Vinaya text (Skandaka) belonging to the first half of the 4th cent. B.C., the A. has established a firm basis for the history of the earliest Buddhist literature. At the same time the development of the biography of the Buddha has been clarified and a starting point has been found for a criticism of the origin of Buddhist church history and its historical value. Lastly, an appendix presents an interesting picture of the tradition and structure of the extant Vinaya works of the different schools and of their Chinese translations.
Contents:
Preface, p. IX
1. The Schools of Buddhism and the Missions of Asoka, p. 1
2. Sarvastivadin and Mulasarvastivadin, p. 24
3. The Origin of the Skandhaka, p. 42
4. Structure and Contents of the Old Skandhaka Text, p. 68
5. The Sources of the Old Skandhaka Text and the Earliest Bud-dhist Tradition, p. 130
6. The Biography of the Buddha and the Beginnings of the Bud-dhist Church History, p. 155
Appendix: Tradition and Structure of the Extant Vinaya Works, p. 172
Index, p. 209
Table of Contents, p. 219
0 有用 会唱歌的耗子 2011-12-13 13:03:52
佛教早期文献的个案研究,依据现存的律部经典还原出一个律部母本。
0 有用 西野鱼竿 2023-10-26 01:36:32 北京
通过汉译广律、巴利律等律藏文献,追溯律典的原初形态。中间脑洞很多,很佩服前辈学者对Ur-text的执念啊…..但也正是有这样的尝试,后人才会把其中衍生出的问题一步步推进,例如有部与根本有部关系的讨论
1 有用 推十 2016-11-30 21:14:41
这本书因为太可爱,让我不得不想到王国维说的“可爱者不可信”,但我觉得人生苦短,学术无涯,能可爱的话,又何必可信呢。反正可不可信和我有锤子关系。
0 有用 kal 2021-05-05 23:55:17
关于根本有部和有部关系的那一章论证我认为是有问题的,所罗列的证据不足以支撑其结论,再者对matrka一笔带过实在不应该。如果承认其思想体系同乘一脉,戒律有共同源头,没有详细论证其论藏同异,怎么也得不到二者不相联的结论。第五章列出三个故事为例,其中都强调了有部与其他派别的不同记载,但是不知道为何直到最后都没有作出解释或者猜想。但是总体而言瑕不掩瑜,很好读,也很有意思。