略论敦煌吐蕃文书P.T.22-P.I.2号《百拜忏悔经》

发布时间：2018-02-25 01:15

本文关键词： 敦煌文本 “Pang kong” “Phyag brgya ba” 语法　出处：《西藏大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：本文以敦煌文书P.T.22中的《百拜忏悔经》为依据,通过对文献材料的梳理,将不同文献中所记载的《百拜忏悔经》进行比较研究,本论文的最终理论框架由三个章节构成。第一章主要论述《百拜忏悔经》传到吐蕃时的社会历史文化背景。首先介绍《百拜忏悔经》名称的不同写法,其后阐明此经之所以命名为《百拜忏悔经》的原由,“spang”是经中强调弃恶从善之理,“skong”是满愿之意;并此经文根据出现一百零五个向诸佛等敬礼之语境,解释了《百拜忏悔经》这一经文名称的由来。笔者认为此经名中的“百”字含有许多之意。《甘珠尔》等经典文献中常用“dpang skong phyag brgya ba”此中写法的经名。因此,笔者在本论文将其作为主要的理论依据进行了相关学术研究。其后论述此经从何处传入西藏在学界有不同见解,根据目前掌握的资料入手,认为从汉地或于阗传入西藏。因为此经未出现在吐蕃时期的三大目录当中,并且此经文的语句相似于汉文佛经,但根据目前掌握的资料还无法准确的断定。在藏文史书中一致认为此经文于吐蕃赞普拉脱脱日聂赞时期传入西藏,而笔者则认为此经在赞普墀松德赞时期传入吐蕃,为此提出了六大论据。最后指出,目前无法确定《甘珠尔》手抄本中是否载有此经文,但在那塘版和德格版的《甘珠尔》明确载有此经文。第二章主要从文书的内容入手,认为此经不能用“七支”来进行注释,并对《百拜忏悔经》是否属于“经”之问题提出了个人的不同看法,因为文献中没有明确表明,对此产生的多种不同看法,导致了对其进行辨伪工作的很难局面。第三章里专对敦煌文书P.T.22号作了系统的文本介绍,同其他文本之间进行深入全面的比较研究,并对文书中的词汇和语句做了对比研究,从而论述其特点。最后与德格版《甘珠尔》中的《百拜忏悔经》进行比较,对照两种版本中的词汇和语句,说明敦煌写本不同于其他版本的主要特点(列如“dbu khyud”和“shad”),依据辨别吐蕃时期的写本之特征对敦煌写本P.T.22号进行了断代。
[Abstract]:On the basis of the Paradise confession in Dunhuang document P.T.22, this paper, by combing the literature materials, makes a comparative study of the "Baibai confessions" recorded in different documents. The final theoretical framework of this thesis is composed of three chapters. The first chapter mainly discusses the social, historical and cultural background of the "Baiba confessions" spread to Tubo. First, it introduces the different writing methods of the names of the "Baiba confessions". The reason why the Scripture is named "the Paradise of repentance" is later explained. "spang" is the scripture that emphasizes the principle of abdication from good, and "skong" is the meaning of full vow, and this scripture is based on the context of 105 salutation to the Buddhas, etc. The author explains the origin of the name of the scripture, the "hundred" word in the title of "Baobai repentance". The author thinks that the word "hundred" in the name of this scripture contains many meanings. The name of the scripture "dpang skong phyag brgya ba" is commonly used in the classical literature such as < Ganjul]. In this paper, the author takes it as the main theoretical basis to carry on the related academic research. After that, the author discusses where this passage has been introduced into Tibet and has different opinions in the academic world, starting with the information available at present. It is believed that this scripture was introduced into Tibet from Han land or Khotan because it did not appear in the three catalogues of the Tubo period, and the sentence of this scripture is similar to that of the Buddhist scriptures in Chinese. However, according to the information available at present, it is not possible to determine accurately. In the Tibetan history books, it is agreed that this text was introduced to Tibet during the Tibetan Zampratou-Niesan period, while the author believes that this passage was introduced to Tibet during the Zampuchi Tsongde Zan period. Six main arguments were put forward. Finally, it was pointed out that it was not possible to determine whether this text was contained in the manuscripts of Ganjul, but the text was clearly contained in the Nagang and Decker editions of the book. Chapter two began mainly with the contents of the instrument. He considered that the Sutra could not be annotated with "seven branches", and put forward different personal views on whether or not the "Baibai confessional Sutra" was part of the Sutra, because the literature did not clearly indicate that there were many different views on it. The third chapter focuses on the systematic text introduction of Dunhuang instrument P.T.22, and makes a deep and comprehensive comparative study between it and other texts, and makes a comparative study of the words and sentences in the instrument. Finally, compared with the Baibai confessions in the Decker edition of Ganjul, the words and sentences in the two versions are compared. This paper illustrates the main features of Dunhuang manuscripts which are different from other editions (such as "dbu khyud" and "shad"). According to the distinguishing features of the manuscripts of the Tubo period, the author makes a dating of P.T.22 of Dunhuang manuscripts.
【学位授予单位】：西藏大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：G256.1;H214

【相似文献】