What do you think?
Rate this book
The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines and Its Verse Summary
English (translation)
325 pages, Hardcover
First published May 1, 1973
5 people are currently reading
139 people want to read
About the author
Edward Conze
34 books27 followersEberhart Julius Dietrich Conze, who published as Edward Conze, studied Indian and comparative philosophy at the universities of Bonn and Hamburg. He later lectured in psychology, philosophy, and comparative religion at Oxford, held a number of academic appointments, and served as Vice-President of the Buddhist Society.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
Read
February 15, 2023100 BCE - 100 CE (100 BCE-600CE)
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
Different manuscripts starting from 10-11th https://www.metmuseum.org/exhibitions...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
https://booksc.org/book/57540534/c99b19 (Emptiness on Palm Leaf: A Twelfth-century Illustrated Manuscript of the "Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā") -article-
Western scholars have traditionally considered the earliest sūtra in the Prajñāpāramitā class to be the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra or "Perfection of Wisdom in 8,000 Lines", which was probably put in writing in the 1st century BCE.[7] This chronology is based on the views of Edward Conze, who largely considered dates of translation into other languages. This text also has a corresponding version in verse format, called the Ratnaguṇasaṃcaya Gāthā, which some believe to be slightly older because it is not written in standard literary Sanskrit. However, these findings rely on late-dating Indian texts, in which verses and mantras are often kept in more archaic forms.[8]
According to Edward Conze, the PP literature developed in nine stages: (1) An urtext similar to the first two chapters of the Sanskrit Ratnagunasaṃcaya Gāthā; (2) Chapters 3 to 28 of the Ratnagunasaṃcaya are composed, along with the prose of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā. This base text was further expanded with (3) material from the Abhidharma, and (4) concessions to the "Buddhism of Faith" (referring to Pure Land references in the sūtra). This process led to (5) further expansion into larger PP sūtras as well as (6) contraction into the shorter sūtras (i.e. Diamond Sūtra, Heart Sūtra, down to the Prajñāpāramitā in One Letter). This expanded corpus formed the basis for the (7) Indian PP Commentaries, (8) Tantric PP works and (9) Chinese Chan texts.[9] Jan Nattier also defends the view that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā developed as various layers were added over time.[8] However, Matthew Orsborn has recently argued, based on the chiastic structures of the text that the entire sūtra may have been composed as a single whole (with a few additions added on the core chapters).[10]
A number of scholars have proposed that the Mahāyāna Prajñāpāramitā teachings were first developed by the Caitika subsect of the Mahāsāṃghikas. They believe that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra originated amongst the southern Mahāsāṃghika schools of the Āndhra region, along the Kṛṣṇa River.[11] These Mahāsāṃghikas had two famous monasteries near Amarāvati Stupa and Dhānyakataka, which gave their names to the Pūrvaśaila and Aparaśaila schools.[12] Each of these schools had a copy of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra in Prakrit.[12] Guang Xing also assesses the view of the Buddha given in the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra as being that of the Mahāsāṃghikas.[12] Edward Conze estimates that this sūtra originated around 100 BCE.[12]
In 2012, Harry Falk and Seishi Karashima published a damaged and partial Kharoṣṭhī manuscript of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā.[13] It is radiocarbon dated to ca. 75 CE, making it one of the oldest Buddhist texts in existence. It is very similar to the first Chinese translation of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā by Lokakṣema (ca. 179 CE) whose source text is assumed to be in the Gāndhārī language; Lokakṣema's translation is also the first extant translation of the Prajñāpāramitā genre into a non-Indic language. Comparison with the standard Sanskrit text shows that it is also likely to be a translation from Gāndhāri as it expands on many phrases and provides glosses for words that are not present in the Gāndhārī. This points to the text being composed in Gāndhārī, the language of Gandhara (the region now called the Northwest Frontier of Pakistan, including Peshawar, Taxila and Swat Valley). The "Split" manuscript is evidently a copy of an earlier text, confirming that the text may date before the 1st century CE.
In contrast to western scholarship, Japanese scholars have traditionally considered the Diamond Sūtra (Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra) to be from a very early date in the development of Prajñāpāramitā literature.[14] The usual reason for this relative chronology which places the Vajracchedikā earlier is not its date of translation, but rather a comparison of the contents and themes.[15] Some western scholars also believe that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra was adapted from the earlier Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra.[14]
Examining the language and phrases used in both the Aṣṭasāhasrikā and the Vajracchedikā, Gregory Schopen also sees the Vajracchedikā as being earlier than the Aṣṭasāhasrikā.[16] This view is taken in part by examining parallels between the two works, in which the Aṣṭasāhasrikā seems to represent the later or more developed position.[16] According to Schopen, these works also show a shift in emphasis from an oral tradition (Vajracchedikā) to a written tradition (Aṣṭasāhasrikā).[16]
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3...
Different manuscripts starting from 10-11th https://www.metmuseum.org/exhibitions...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
https://booksc.org/book/57540534/c99b19 (Emptiness on Palm Leaf: A Twelfth-century Illustrated Manuscript of the "Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā") -article-
Western scholars have traditionally considered the earliest sūtra in the Prajñāpāramitā class to be the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra or "Perfection of Wisdom in 8,000 Lines", which was probably put in writing in the 1st century BCE.[7] This chronology is based on the views of Edward Conze, who largely considered dates of translation into other languages. This text also has a corresponding version in verse format, called the Ratnaguṇasaṃcaya Gāthā, which some believe to be slightly older because it is not written in standard literary Sanskrit. However, these findings rely on late-dating Indian texts, in which verses and mantras are often kept in more archaic forms.[8]
According to Edward Conze, the PP literature developed in nine stages: (1) An urtext similar to the first two chapters of the Sanskrit Ratnagunasaṃcaya Gāthā; (2) Chapters 3 to 28 of the Ratnagunasaṃcaya are composed, along with the prose of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā. This base text was further expanded with (3) material from the Abhidharma, and (4) concessions to the "Buddhism of Faith" (referring to Pure Land references in the sūtra). This process led to (5) further expansion into larger PP sūtras as well as (6) contraction into the shorter sūtras (i.e. Diamond Sūtra, Heart Sūtra, down to the Prajñāpāramitā in One Letter). This expanded corpus formed the basis for the (7) Indian PP Commentaries, (8) Tantric PP works and (9) Chinese Chan texts.[9] Jan Nattier also defends the view that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā developed as various layers were added over time.[8] However, Matthew Orsborn has recently argued, based on the chiastic structures of the text that the entire sūtra may have been composed as a single whole (with a few additions added on the core chapters).[10]
A number of scholars have proposed that the Mahāyāna Prajñāpāramitā teachings were first developed by the Caitika subsect of the Mahāsāṃghikas. They believe that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra originated amongst the southern Mahāsāṃghika schools of the Āndhra region, along the Kṛṣṇa River.[11] These Mahāsāṃghikas had two famous monasteries near Amarāvati Stupa and Dhānyakataka, which gave their names to the Pūrvaśaila and Aparaśaila schools.[12] Each of these schools had a copy of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra in Prakrit.[12] Guang Xing also assesses the view of the Buddha given in the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra as being that of the Mahāsāṃghikas.[12] Edward Conze estimates that this sūtra originated around 100 BCE.[12]
In 2012, Harry Falk and Seishi Karashima published a damaged and partial Kharoṣṭhī manuscript of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā.[13] It is radiocarbon dated to ca. 75 CE, making it one of the oldest Buddhist texts in existence. It is very similar to the first Chinese translation of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā by Lokakṣema (ca. 179 CE) whose source text is assumed to be in the Gāndhārī language; Lokakṣema's translation is also the first extant translation of the Prajñāpāramitā genre into a non-Indic language. Comparison with the standard Sanskrit text shows that it is also likely to be a translation from Gāndhāri as it expands on many phrases and provides glosses for words that are not present in the Gāndhārī. This points to the text being composed in Gāndhārī, the language of Gandhara (the region now called the Northwest Frontier of Pakistan, including Peshawar, Taxila and Swat Valley). The "Split" manuscript is evidently a copy of an earlier text, confirming that the text may date before the 1st century CE.
In contrast to western scholarship, Japanese scholars have traditionally considered the Diamond Sūtra (Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra) to be from a very early date in the development of Prajñāpāramitā literature.[14] The usual reason for this relative chronology which places the Vajracchedikā earlier is not its date of translation, but rather a comparison of the contents and themes.[15] Some western scholars also believe that the Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra was adapted from the earlier Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra.[14]
Examining the language and phrases used in both the Aṣṭasāhasrikā and the Vajracchedikā, Gregory Schopen also sees the Vajracchedikā as being earlier than the Aṣṭasāhasrikā.[16] This view is taken in part by examining parallels between the two works, in which the Aṣṭasāhasrikā seems to represent the later or more developed position.[16] According to Schopen, these works also show a shift in emphasis from an oral tradition (Vajracchedikā) to a written tradition (Aṣṭasāhasrikā).[16]
October 11, 2014
Apparently this is the only coherent version of a long 'perfection of wisdom' sutra. _Heart_Sutra_ is an abstract, _Diamond_Sutra_ is a summary. Both the latter and the one in 8000 lines are heavy reading, but worth it for an introduction to Mahayana ideas. I would suggest 1st read _Heart_Sutra_, then the verse summary of the 8000 lines one, then _Diamond_Sutra_, then the 8000 lines.
October 14, 2012
A great translation of the famous Ashtasahasrika Prajna Paramita Sutra, the spring from which all the Mahayana tradition takes its source. A must read for all those interested in or following Mahayana Buddhism!
January 21, 2016
Prajnaparamita, Mother of the Buddhas! What more can be said?
Read
June 3, 2018Very deep. I want to read it again.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews