CAJ | 학술논문

从12条佛教词语（短语）入手，可以考察《大方便佛报恩经》的年代。其中“观世音菩萨”、“四围陀”、“释氏宫”见于后秦译经；“大悲愿”,“不请友”，与《大方便佛报恩经》中如来十号相同的十种具体名称“如来、应供、正遍知、明行足、善逝、世间解、无上士、调御丈夫、天人师、佛世尊”以及“萨遮尼乾”，“天宝香、天宝花（华）”和“一箭道”均见于东晋以后译经；“无量百千万亿阿僧祇劫”最早见于东晋十六国及以后译经；“三藏九部”除《大方便佛报恩经》外，其余用例均见于南北朝以后的中土佛教典籍；“五盖十缠”最早见于南朝梁的《慈悲道场忏法》。这12条佛教词语表明，《大方便佛报恩经》不是东汉时期的文献。如果是译经,它的翻译年代当在东晋之后。
종12조불교사어（단어）입수，가이고찰《대방편불보은경》적년대。기중“관세음보살”、“사위타”、“석씨궁”견우후진역경；“대비원”,“불청우”，여《대방편불보은경》중여래십호상동적십충구체명칭“여래、응공、정편지、명행족、선서、세간해、무상사、조어장부、천인사、불세존”이급“살차니건”，“천보향、천보화（화）”화“일전도”균견우동진이후역경；“무량백천만억아승기겁”최조견우동진십륙국급이후역경；“삼장구부”제《대방편불보은경》외，기여용례균견우남북조이후적중토불교전적；“오개십전”최조견우남조량적《자비도장천법》。저12조불교사어표명，《대방편불보은경》불시동한시기적문헌。여과시역경,타적번역년대당재동진지후。
Scholars differ in their opinions on the features, author, record, editions and the age of popularity of Dafangbianfo Bao＇en Jing whose translator was unknown and which was affiliated to the Buddhist sutra catalogue of Eastern Han Dynasty. Some argued that it was a fake Buddhist sutra. Others claimed that it was a translated Buddhist sutra, but the translation was not done in Eastern Han Dynasty. In this paper,we try to verify its age by analyzing 12 Buddhist terms. According to the studies of Lou Yulie,the term Ava okltesvara （观世音菩萨） appeared for the first time in the translations of the famous Buddha Kumarajiva living in Later Qin Dynasty. The detailed information of the other eleven Buddhist terms is as follows： Some of them appeared for the first time in the translated versions during or after Eastern Jin Dynasty, such as ＂mahdkaru n a＂（大悲愿） ,＂ Sazhe Niqian＂（萨遮尼乾） ,＂ Tianbaohua＂（天宝花/华）, ＂incalculable kalpafisarn, khyeya＂（无量百千万亿阿僧祇劫） which was an idiom used to describe an extremely long period of time, and ＂an arrow＇s flight＂（一箭道）, a length unit in Buddhist sutras. ＂Buqingyou＂（不请友） appeared in the Buddhist sutras written by native Chinese after Eastern Jin Dynasty. The ten kinds of concrete names--＂Buddha＂（如来） ,＂Bhuji.s ya＂（应供） ,＂Samyak-sambuddha.h＂（正遍知）, ＂Vidy＆ caran, a- sarn. panna＂（明行足） ,＂ Svayarn. - b hu（善逝）, ＂Lokavi d＂（世间解）, ＂Sattva- sara＂（无上士） ,＂Puru.sa-damaka＂（调御丈夫）,＂Nara-ndyaka＂（天人师） and ＂Bhagavat＂（佛世尊）-which were the same as the ten names of Buddha in Dafangbianfo Bao＇en Jing appeared for the first time in the translations of Eastern Jin Dynasty and were frequently used especially in Kumarajiva＇s translations. Apart from Dafangbianfo Bao＇en Jing, the term ＂Sanzang Jiubu＂（三藏九部） appeared in the Buddhist sutras written by native Chinese after the Northern and Southern Dynasties. ＂The Palace of Shishi（释氏） ,＂ where Sakyamuni lived,first appeared in Kumarajiva＇s translations in the Later Qin Dynasty but became ＂Shishi Jingshe＂（释氏精舍） in Eastern Han Dynasty. ＂Si Weituo＂（四围陀） is found in the translations of Later Qin Dynasty. ＂Tianbao Xiang＂（天宝香） and ＂Tianbaohua＂ were the offerings that Buddhists contributed to the Buddha. ＂Xiang＂（香）,＂Tianxiang＂（天香） ,＂H ua＂（花/华） and ＂Tianhua＂（天花/华） were used only in the Buddhist sutras of Eastern Han Dynasty,with ＂Tmnbaohuaxmng＇＂＂（天宝花香） first appearing in the Buddhist sutras of the Three-Kingdom period. In the translationsof Eastern ; . .n ;; Han and Three-Kingdom periods,only Wugal （五盖）, the first part of ＂Wugai Shichan＇（五盖十缠） was used,and ＂Shichaff＇（十缠） first appeared in the translations of Later Qin Dynasty, with the combination ＂Wugai Shichan＂ appearing for the first time in the Kgantiqilyuluqnombitig of Southern Liang Dynasty. These twelve Buddhist terms show that Dafangbianfo Bao＇en Jing was not written in Eastern Han. If it is a translation,it should be done after Eastern Jin Dynasty. Special attention should be paid to the terms ＂Sanzang Jiubu＂ and ＂Wugai Shichan. ＂Their credible examples were all found after Song of Southern Dynasties. We can draw the conclusion that Dafangbianfo Bao＇en Jing was a Buddhist sutra whose age of compilation was very close to Chusanzangji Ji （between the year 510 A. D. and 518 A. D. ） and Jinglu Yixiang（in the year 516 A. D. ）. Thus it is really odd that its translator was unknown. Meanwhile,apart from the use in Dafangbianfo Bao＇en Jing, the term ＂Wugai Shichan＂ only appeared in Buddhist literature written by native Chinese. According to the above analysis, we arrive at the tentative conclusion that this sutra was written by native Chinese Buddhists,and was not a translated version.