俄藏敦煌写卷ф.102《维摩经疏》研究

A Study of The Record on the Meanings of the Vimalakirti-Nirdesa Sutra in the Russian Collection of Dunhuang Manuscript ф. 102

俄藏敦煌写卷ф.102《维摩经疏》残卷1-56行内容与隋代慧远《维摩义记》卷第一颇多相同;56行题有"维摩经疏第一";57-317行内容系疏释罗什本《维摩诘经》之《佛道品第八》至《嘱累品第十四》,与S.2732《维摩经义记·卷第四》各品内容几乎全同,只是小有简略,当与P.2273、日本大谷二乐庄旧藏同为一系。ф.102分别汇抄二种有关《维摩诘经》的注疏以成编,不论是前部抄录慧远《维摩义记》卷第一,还是第二部分抄录S.2732佚名《维摩经义记》所疏释各品内容,皆系精心摘录裁剪且有所增补,并非一字不漏的照录,其文字简明流畅,极便于研习和讲授,呈现了敦煌佛教日常用经的抄本特色,是《维摩诘经》义疏学的宝贵资料。

This paper deals with a Dunhuang manuscript ф.102(M.1286)recorded in Kitaiskie Dokumentiiz Dun’khuna: Vipusk 1. Chinese Doucments from Dunhuang. It is called the commentary on the Vilamlakirti-nirdesa Sutra, chapters 1 and 2. Although below line 56 there is the original title, the content of the lines 1-56 in the original manuscript seems to be the same as the chapter one of the Sui Buddhist master Huiyuan’s The Record on the Meanings of the Vimalakirti-nirdesa Sutra. Yet lines 57-317 seem to come from chapters 8-14 of Kumarajiva’s translations of the Vimalakirti-Nirdesa Sutra. Its content also matches the Dunhuang manuscript S. 2732. There are some small variants. Anyway, the manuscript ф.102(M.1286)seems to be a sheet with two different texts. Many texts in Dunhuang manuscripts do not have a fixed form and style, which is very different from the traditional transmitted literature. The manuscript ф.102 was from Huiyuan’s text, but it has some selected excerpts with additions. The second section of this manuscript, though its content is close to S.2732, looks more concise and elegant, which shows that it came from an eminent monk who edited the text for his own study or for his lecture. These texts are so valuable for understanding the commentaries of the Vilamakirti-nirdesa Sutra.