MAHĀPIṬAKA
Newsletter New Series No. 27

January 1, 2022

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE of
the ENGLISH TRANSLATIONof the CHINESE TRIPIṬAKA
Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai(Society for the Promotion of Buddhism)

Editor: Kenneth K. Tanaka

Table of Contents
Publishing Schedule
Published in 2021.................................................................................................. 1
Forthcoming titles ................................................................................................. 1
Review:
The Fayuan Zhulin (The Jade Garden of Dharma Forest) Vol. I(Translated by Koichi Shinohara)
By OKADA Fumihiro ............................................................................................ 2
The Madhyama Āgama (Middle-length Discourses) Vols. I–II
(Vol. I, Edited by Marcus Bingenheimer)(Vol. II, Edited by Bhikkhu Anālayo and Roderick S. Bucknell)
By NAWA Ryūken................................................................................................. 4
Report:Symposium of Chinese Buddhism Organized by the Association for Studies ofChinese Society and Culture
By MINOWA Kenryō ............................................................................................. 6

Committee Members ........................................................................................................ 9

Publishing Schedule
Published in 2021:

THE MAHAYANA SUTRA OF PREVIOUS LIVES AND CONTEMPLATION
OF THE MIND-GROUND(大乘本生心地觀經 Daijō-honjō-shinji-kangyō, Taishō 159)
Translated by Rolf W. Giebel

ANALYSIS OF THE MIDDLE AND EXTREMES / THE SCRIPTURE ON THE
MONK NĀGASENA(辯中邊論 Ben-chū-hen-ron, Taishō 1600/ 那先比丘經 Nasen-biku-kyō, Taishō 1670B)
Translated by Jeffrey Kotyk/ Bhikkhu Anālayo

THE FAYUAN ZHULIN (THE JADE GARDEN OF DHARMA FOREST)(法苑珠林 Hō-on-jurin, Taishō 2122)

Volume IV (Fasc. 21–27)
Translated by Harumi Hirano Ziegler

YONG’S SONG OF ACTUALIZING THE WAY/ OBSERVING THE MIND,
AWAKENING FROM A DREAM(永嘉證道歌 Yōka-shōdōka, Taishō 2014/ 觀心覺夢鈔 Kanjin-kakumu-shō, Taishō 2312)
Translated by A. Charles Muller
Forthcoming titles:

THE FAYUAN ZHULIN (THE JADE GARDEN OF DHARMA FOREST)(法苑珠林 Hō-on-jurin, Taishō 2122)

Volume V–VI (Fasc. 28–40)
Translated by Harumi Hirano Ziegler

THE MADHYAMA ĀGAMA (MIDDLE-LENGTH DISCOURSES)(中阿含經 Chū-agonkyō, Taishō 26)

Volume III–IV
Translated by 關則富, 朱倍賢, 釋法曜, Marcus Bingenheimer, and 釋純因
Edited by Bhikkhu Anālayo and Roderick S. Bucknell

KEY TO THE SECRET TREASURY/ THE HUNDRED RECORDS OF THE
TEMPLE OF NATIONAL PURITY(般若心経秘鍵 Hannyashngyō-hiken, Taishō 2203-A/ 國淸百録 Koku-sei-hyaku-roku,
Taishō 1934)
Translated by Matthew McMullen/ Paul L. Swanson

THE DIAMOND NEEDLE/ THE ESSENTIAL TEACHING ON THE METHODOF PRACTICING ŚAMATHA AND VIPAŚYANĀ OR A BRIEF
CLARIFICATION OF THE ESSENTIAL TEACHINGS OF SITTING
MEDITATION CALLED XIAO ZHI-GUAN(金剛針論 Kongō-shin-ron, Taishō 1642/ 修習止觀坐禪法要 Shujū-shikan-zazen-hōyō,
Taishō 1915)
Translated by KAWAMURA Yūto and BAI Jinghao/ ICHISHIMA Shōshin

TREATISE ON DOCTRINAL DISTINCTIONS OF THE HUAYAN ONE
VEHICLE(華嚴一乘教義分齊章 Kegon-ichijō-kyōgi-bunzai-shō, Taishō 1866)
Translated by *Taitetsu Unno, Mark Unno, and Monica E. McLellan

1

TREATISE ON THE TEN GROUNDS(十住毘婆沙論 Jūjū-bibasha-ron, Taishō 1521)
Translated by Dharmamitra

FLOWER ORNAMENT SUTRA (AVATAṂSAKA-SŪTRA)(大方廣佛華嚴經 Dai-hōkō-butsu-kegon-gyō, Taishō 279)
Translated by Dharmamitra

Review:

The Fayuan Zhulin (The Jade Garden of Dharma Forest) Vol. I(Translated by Koichi Shinohara)
OKADA Fumihiro
Lecturer, Minobusan University
The Fayuan zhulin, compiled by Daoshi in the year 666 or 668 of the Tang dynasty, contains a vast
number of quotations from the Buddhist Tripiṭaka as well as from non-Buddhist texts, historical books,
and novels. This text is categorized and explained in 100 fascicles or 668 sections and has often beenreferred to as “an encyclopedia of Buddhism.” A Forest of Pearls from the Dharma Garden in the BDKEnglish Tripiṭaka Series is an attempt to translate it in its entirety, and this paper will discuss and review
the first volume, which contains fascicles 1–7.
Daoshi, the editor of the Fayuan zhulin, was ordained at the age of 12 and studied Vinaya at the
Qinglong Monastery in Chang’an. Later, in the Xianqing period (656–661), he participated in scripture
translation project led by Xuanzang. In the third year of the Xianqing period (658), when the Ximing
Monastery was completed, Xuanzang moved there to continue his work on the scripture translation
project. Daoshi also moved to Ximing Monastery, where he met Daoxuan. Daoxuan, along with
Xuanzang, was deeply involved in Daoshi’s academic life. For example, Daoshi’s work Zhujiao yaoji
was sometimes confused with Daoxuan’s work (KOMINAMI 1993, 303.)
Incidentally, the Zhujiao yaoji was written in the same style as the Fayuan zhulin. In other words,
Daoshi edited several compilations based on excerpts from classical works. These books are classified
as "leishu", which means “encyclopedia” in Chinese literature, and many similar books were produced
during the Northern and Southern Dynasties and the Sui and Tang Dynasties: the Fayuan jing (the yearsof the Southern Qi period, 479–502), the Jinglüyixiang compiled by Baochang (516), Neidian boyao
compiled by Yu Xiaojing (the Liang dynasty, 502–557), etc. The Fayuan zhulin constitutes a
representative work of this kind of Buddhist leishu.
The most outstanding features of the Fayuan zhulin is that it contains many mystical and fantastic
episodes that serve as concrete examples of the benefits of Buddhism. These episodes are collected in asection called “ganying yuan,” which means “affairs about communing with the Buddha.” In thisvolume, the ganying yuan is translated as “Miracle story.” This is a rather drastic but good translation
because it is easy to understand.

2

And it is only this ganying yuan that has attracted attention in the past. In fact, the Fayuan zhulin
has not yet been fully translated into Japanese, and there are only two abridged translations (KOMINAMI,
1993; Hōon jurin kenkyūkai, 2015 and 2016), both of which are extracts from the ganying yuan. Thus,
for example, fascicles 1–3, which are translated in this volume, do not include the ganying yuan andwere omitted and overlooked in the previous abridged translations. Therefore, before examining andcriticizing the details of the translation, we must first appreciate the fact that the concept of attempting
a “complete translation” itself is groundbreaking.
So, why was it not completely translated into Japanese? It is not that the Fayuan zhulin has been
neglected in Japanese studies. On the contrary, the Fayuan zhulin has been given great importance inthe field of narrative literature studies. However, the Fayuan zhulin is such a large volume that it isdifficult to translate it in full. Moreover, most of it is a collection of existing sutra quotations. Becauseof this characteristic, it was probably decided to summarize and translate only those portions that wereconsidered particularly worthy of translation. Therefore, there was only an abridgement of the ganying
yuan.
However, there may be important points in parts that have not received particular attention so far,such as the chapters other than the ganying yuan. There may be many anecdotes of valuable literaturethat are scattered today hidden in the vast number of quotations, and the originality of the editors may
be reflected in the selection and arrangement of the references. The Translator’s Introduction of thisvolume states that “Daoshi’s voice is heard throughout the anthology” (p. xv). Daoshi’s writings, theFayuan zhulin or the Zhujing yaoji, have been perceived as nothing more than “extracts,” and the ideaof finding Daoshi's original “voice” in them would be epoch-making. With this complete translation, we
will be able to witness an overview of the Fayuan zhulin anew, and if we are able to grasp the important
aspects of this book that have been overlooked until now, as well as the originality of Daoshi that isburied here and there, we may discover something new.
In addition, as for the style of the text of this volume, it is convenient that the volume and page
numbers of Taishō Tripiṭaka —the source of the quotations— are clearly indicated. Thus, this also
makes it significant as a translation study.
It is a great accomplishment of this project that the Fayuan zhulin will now be introduced to theworld through this English translation. It will also serve as a great stimulus to Japanese researchers.
References
KOMINAMI, Ichiro 小南一郎. 1993. “Hōon jurin 法苑珠林.” In Daijōbutten Chūgoku nihon hen dai 3 kan,
Shutsu sanzō kishū・Hōon jurin 大乗仏典 中国・日本篇 第 3 巻 出三蔵記集・法苑珠林, Tokyo:Chūō kōronsha 中央公論社.
Hōon jurin kenkyūkai 『法苑珠林』研究会. 2015. “Hōon jurin Kannōen yakuchū kō 1.” (『法苑珠林』感応縁訳注稿(1)) Jōchi shigaku (上智史学) 60: 11–29.
Hōon jurin kenkyūkai 『法苑珠林』研究会. 2016. “Hōon jurin Kannōen yakuchū kō 2.” (『法苑珠林』感応縁訳注稿(2)) Jōchi shigaku (上智史学) 61: 47–83.

3

Review:

The Madhyama Āgama (Middle-length Discourses) Vols. I–II
(Vol. I, Edited by Marcus Bingenheimer)(Vol. II, Edited by Bhikkhu Anālayo and Roderick S. Bucknell)
NAWA Ryūken
Lecturer, Osaka University

The works under review are the first two of four volumes of a full English translation of the Zhong ahanjing (中阿含經, T[aishō] vol. 1, no. 26), which “is one of the four major canonical collections of early
Buddhist sutras preserved in Chinese” (Volume I, xv). The remaining two volumes are not yet published(as of Nov. 2021). When the rest are published, a full translation of two of the four Chinese Ahan (Skt.
āgama) collections—namely, the Chang ahan jing (長阿含經, T vol. 1, no. 1) and the Zhong ahan
jing—will become available in a Western language for the first time through the BDK English Tripiṭaka
Series.
Volume I (2013) of the works under review was edited by Marcus Bingenheimer (the editor-inchief), Bhikkhu Anālayo, and Roderick S. Bucknell (the co-editors), and Volume II (2020) by the latter
two. A team, which consists of the three editors with five translators in Volume I (eight in total) and thesame three with two in Volume II (five in total), worked on the translation of each volume. For the listof the members in each volume, see Volume I, xxv and Volume II, xvi.
Each of the two volumes contains “Introduction” (to Volume I by Bingenheimer and Volume II
by Anālayo and Bucknell), English translation, “Notes,” “Bibliography,” and “Index,” as is usual thecase with the other volumes of the BDK English Tripiṭaka Series.
The “Introduction” to Volume I “provides essential background information on topics such as thegenre of textual collections referred to as Āgamas and Nikāyas; the Madhyama-āgama in particular; thecircumstances in which the Madhyama-āgama came to be translated from the Indic source language
into Chinese in the fourth century C.E., yielding the text titled Zhong ahan jing” (Volume II, xv).
I found the quality of English translation to be highly reliable. Each member of the team prepared
the first draft of the translation of the assigned divisions of the Zhong ahan jing, and the editors of eachvolume revised it including the endnotes (“[f]or Volumes II–IV the sets of endnotes were compiled by
Bhikkhu Anālayo.” Volume II, xvii). It is noteworthy that the team followed the terminology and idiom
which were established by Bhikkhu Bodhi in both the translations of Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoḷi (tr.) and
Bhikkhu Bodhi (ed.), The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha (Boston: Wisdom Publications,
1995) and Bhikkhu Bodhi (tr.), The Connected Discourses of the Buddha (Boston: Wisdom Publications,
2000). The team adopted this policy “in the belief that readers of the Āgamas will probably also beinterested in the Nikāyas” (Volume I, xxvi). For the same reason, they chose to render personal andplace names in Pāli, even while recognizing that the Indian based text of the Zhong ahan jing was not
written in Pāli but in “some Middle Indic or mixed dialect of Prakrit with Sanskrit elements” (VolumeI, xix). Except for the cases above, “[m]ost of the Indic terms included in the Shorter Oxford English

4Dictionary (e.g., Dharma, karma, or nirvana) have been used as English terms in the translation.”
Incidentally, some readers may find it confusing that on the one hand, the team refers to only the nameof Bodhi for the translation of the Majjhimanikāya in the “Introduction” (Volume I, xxvi), on the other
hand, only the name of Ñāṇamoli for the same work in the “Bibliography.” In the “Bibliography” toVolume II, the team adds the name of Bodhi correctly.
In the “Notes,” the team provides worthy information such as the interpretations of difficult words,
text emendation, and differences between the sutras in the Zhong ahan jing and its Pāli parallels. From
Volume II, the team makes use of Bodhi’s translation of the Aṅguttaranikāya, Bhikkhu Bodhi, The
Numerical Discourses of the Buddha (Bristol: Pali Text Society in association with Wisdom
Publications, 2012).
As I mentioned above, the team provides reliable English translation and worthy information on
the Zhong ahan jing. There seem to contain, however, some minor issues. I shall point to some of thembelow:• For the Sanskrit title of the Zhong ahan jing, The translation team themselves seem to use thedescription “Madhyamāgama” in Volume I and “Madhyama-āgama” in Volume II correctly,
except for the cases that they refer to the works done by the others. But the description“Madhyama Āgama” is used on the front cover, the contents page, etc.
• “Manoratha pūraṇī” in Volume I, 553, n. 150 should be corrected to “Manorathapūraṇī.”• The team sometimes uses the same English word for different Chinese characters: for example,
the team translates both wu ming (無明) in T vol. 1: 434b26, chi (癡) in T vol. 1: 485b8 as“ignorance” (Volume I, 70.10; 320.8), and wu zhi (無知) in T vol. 1: 435a17 as “ignorant”(Volume I, 73.13), even though these three Chinese characters play different roles in the
Buddhist doctrine. Also, the team usually distinguishes nie pan (涅槃) and ban nie pan (般涅槃) as “nirvana” and “final nirvana,” but ban nie pan in T vol. 1: 580b21 is translated as just“nirvana” in Volume II, 217.18.
• The team sometimes does not follow the terminology and idiom of Bodhi: for sheng (聖),although the team usually translates the word as “noble (ones),” the same word in T vol. 1:
448c28–a21 is translated as “worthy ones” in Volume I, 141–143. Bodhi translates ariya-,which corresponds to sheng, as “noble (ones).” First, the translation “worthy one(s)” is proper
for arahant- (in Pāli; Skt. arhant-), of which corresponding Chinese words are such as a luo
he (阿羅訶. T vol. 1: 422b28) or a luo han (阿羅漢. T vol. 1: 563c13). The team usuallytranslates the Chinese words as “arahant(s).”• Some endnotes do not provide sufficient information: for example, the team translates fa tang(法堂) in T vol. 1: 483a9 as “Sudhamma Hall” and gives the following explanation in theendnote 132, which is added to fa tang in question: “[t]he Chinese has only Dharma hall (fatang). It is clear from the context that this is the Sudhamma Hall (shanfa tang), the usual
assembly place for the thirty-three gods (Gunapala Malalasekera, Dictionary of Pali Proper
Names [London: Pali Text Society, 1974], s.v.).” If you refer to the dictionary, you will findthat there are five different entries on “Sudhamma” (Malalasekera 1974, 1202–1203).

5

Moreover, the explanation on the hall in question is found at the entry “3. Sudhammā”(Malalasekera 1974, 1203–1204), not “Sudhamma.”• It is worthy that the team provides the sutra titles of the Pāli parallels in endnotes, but there
are no explanatory notes as to from which editions they adopt the titles. Some of themcorrespond to the Pali Text Society’s edition (hereafter, E[uropean] e[dition]), and some to the
Burmese edition (Be). For example, in the endnote 168, the team says: “Cf. Makhādeva-sutta,
MN II 74.” The Roman number “II” and the Arabian number “74” represent the volume andpage numbers of the Ee, as is explained in Volume II, xvii.15ff. (not in Volume I). For thesutra title in question, the Ee gives “Makhādevasutta,” and the Be does “Maghadevasutta” (soS[iamese] e[dition]). In this case, the title which the team provides corresponds to the Ee. In
the endnote 82, however, the team says: “Cf. Asibandhakaputta-sutta, SN IV 311.” The Eegives “Pacchābhūmako (or Matako)” and the Be does “Asibandhakaputtasutta” (“bhūmaka”
in the Se). In this case, the title which the team provides corresponds to the Be. I am not sure
why such discrepancy occurred, but the Pāli titles which the team provides seem to correspondto those of the translations of Ñāṇamoḷi and Bodhi. The title “Makhādeva Sutta” is found atÑāṇamoḷi and Bodhi 1995 (8.8) and “Asibandhakaputta” at Bodhi 2000 (vol. 2, 1119.1). At
any rate, an explanation on this issue would be helpful.
Again, what I mentioned above are merely minor issues. They do not, at all, undermine the valueof the worthy contents of these two volumes. First, it is hard to keep consistency throughout under thevarious, shifting contexts of the Zhong ahan jing and the complex procedures carried out by multiple
members of the translation team. If anything, I believe they have realized a very high standard despite
the challenging circumstances. I look forward to reading the remaining two volumes.

Report:Symposium of Chinese Buddhism
Organized by the Association for Studies of Chinese Society and Culture
MINOWA Kenryō
Professor, the University of Tokyo
On 4 July 2021, a symposium entitled "The Development and Spread of Buddhism in the Five Dynasties
and Song Dynasty" was held at the Conference of the Association for Studies of Chinese Society andCulture. The symposium was composed of three parts: the first part, entitled, “The Development of
Buddhism in Central China,” was presented by TSUCHIYA Daisuke, YANAGI Mikiyasu and YOSHIMURA
Makoto; the second part, entitled, “The Influence of Buddhism on the Periphery,” was presented by
FUJIWARA Takahito, SATO Atsushi and MURAKAMI Akiya. In the third part, a general discussion took
place. This panel, organized by Professors MINOWA and YOKOTE of the University of Tokyo, was6intended to provide a broad overview of recent developments in the studies of Chinese Buddhism, andto consider the impact of these developments in China on the periphery, i.e., the northern regions ofChina, Qidan, Korea and Japan.
It is well known that Buddhism in China reached a major turning point between the Five Dynasties
and the Song dynasty, when Buddhism and Daoism, which had been the dominant religions in society
through the Tang dynasty, were replaced by Confucianism from the Song dynasty. Within this change,
Zen Buddhism emerged as the dominant religion, and the first to play a role in this change was Fayan
Wenyi (885–958), who became the founder of Fayan school. Prof. TSUCHIYA’s presentation focused on
this Wenyi. He reported that Wenyi based his arguments on the Huayan thought. Tsuchiya took as his
starting point Wenyi’s Huayan Liuxiang yisong, and discussed the differences found in the phrases of
Chokei Huiling (854–932), Wenyi’s teacher, and of Wenyi. In the background, there was a movementin which the disciples of Deshan Xuanjian (780–865) were divided into two groups: the Xuefeng Yicun(822–908) group and the Xuanzha Shibei (835–908) group. This might be a reason for Wen Yi’s use of
Huayan thought.
Next, YANAGI reported on Yongming Yanshou (904–976), who emerged from the Fayan lineage
and was active in the Wu-Yue Kingdom. At first the Xuefeng lineage was dominant in Wu-Yue
Kingdom, but this was soon replaced by the Xuanzha lineage. However, the Zongjing-lu of Yongming
Yanshou, who belonged to the Xuanzha lineage, made no mention of the internal conflicts within the
Chan sects, or of the conflicts between the Xuefeng and Xuanzha lineages that existed at that time. Thiswas probably due to his concern for Qian Hongxu (reigned, 948–978), the king of the Wu-Yue Kingdom,
but it is also thought that outside the Wu-Yue Kingdom he aimed to uplift Buddhism in a situation where
it was in decline.
YOSHIMURA reported on how Xuanzang (602–664)’s teachings were passed on to later
generations. It is said that the teachings of the Yogacara school was widely promoted at the time of
Xuanzang, however, not much is known about what happened after his death. YOSHIMURA examined
the Biography of a High Priest of the Song Dynasty and suggests that Yogācāra school was studied
through the Song Dynasty, based on the evidence that statues of Master Ci-en (632–682) were placed intemples all around China.
The next development of Buddhism in the periphery was first reported by FUJIWARA. Buddhism
flourished in the northern ethnic state of Qidan (Liao), where Huayan and Esoteric Buddhism became
mainstream. In addition, he reported on the connection of the Precept school with the ruling class,including the emperor. Next, Mr. SATO reported on Buddhism in Gaoli. As is well known, Buddhism
flourished during Gaoli Dynasty, but there was also exchange with the Chinese state of Wu-Yue
Kingdom. He reported that Gaoli had sent some materials that had been lost in mainland China and thatmany Chan priests had come from Wu-Yue kingdom. It can be said that it was during this exchangewith the Wu-Yue Kingdom during the Gaoli Dyanasty period that the Caoxi School flourished to thepresent day. Finally, Murakami reported on the historical exchange of ideas in the Song dynasty,
focusing on the Tendai movement. From the time of Saichō (766/767–822), the Japanese Tiantai monks
had sometimes asked questions about the Tiantai doctrine to Chinese Tiantai monks. For example, inthe middle of the Heian period (794–1185), Genshin (942–1017) also made enquiries to the Chinese
7

Tiantai establishment. It is noteworthy that the questions raised from the Japanese side wereincorporated in the ideological development of the Chinese Tiantai sect.
In the third part of the discussion, it was confirmed that the Zen Buddhism of Wenyi may havefollowed the ideas of the Huayan Sutra itself. It is often thought that Chan Buddhism has its own
ideological development, but this does not seem to be the case. Indeed, the influence of the Laṅkāvatārasūtra and the Vajrachedikā Prajñāpāramitā-sūtra has been pointed out in the early lamp histories ofChan. We must not forget the perspective that not only the lamp history books handed down by Chan
Buddhism, but also the recorded sayings, reflect the ideas of the sutras. Next, concerning the influenceof the Yogācāra school, it was argued that, since there are scattered mentions on the study of “Jushelun”
in the writings of the Biography of a High Priest, “Jushelun” must have been studied after Xuanzang,
too. In other words, the characteristic of phenomena as the basic science of Buddhism may have beenstudied continuously. This is consistent with the fact that in Japan, too, the Jushelun was widely studied
as a basic science, even outside of the Hossō sect. For example, it is known that in the Middle Ages theThirty Jushelun lectures were held at great temples such as Tōdaiji and Kōfukuji. It has been suggested
that the Jushelun theory may have been studied as a common element of Buddhism both in China andin Japan.
In addition, if we position China as the main part, then the northern part of the country, the Qidan,
the Korea and Japan, are the periphery, and it is thought that the Buddhism of the main part, or Wuyue
kingdom, had an influence on the periphery. In addition, although the Japanese Buddhist perspective
tends to assume the influence of the China on Japan, there are examples of the influence of Japan on
Chinese Buddhism, which creates a new perspective in the study of Japanese Buddhism.
In summary, this symposium was an opportunity to reflect on the current state of research on the
Buddhism in East Asia between the tenth and thirteenth centuries, and to explore future issues.

8Committee Members
Editorial Committee, Tokyo:
Kenneth K. Tanaka (Chairperson), Professor Emeritus, Musashino University
ICHISHIMA Shōshin, Professor Emeritus, Taisho University
KATSURA Shōryū, Professor Emeritus, Hiroshima University
MINOWA Kenryō, The University of Tokyo
Muller, A. Charles. Musashino UniversitySAITŌ Akira, International College for Postgraduate Buddhist Studies
SHIMODA Masahiro, The University of TokyoWATANABE Shōgo, Toyo University
YONEZAWA Yoshiyasu, Taisho University
Publication Committee, Berkeley:
A. Charles Muller (Chairperson), Musashino University
Carl W. Bielefeldt, Professor Emeritus, Stanford University
Marianne Dresser, BDK America
Hudaya Kandahjaya, BDK America
Brian Kensho Nagata, BDK America
Robert H. Sharf, University of California, BerkeleyMAHĀPIṬAKA
Newsletter New Series No.27
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE of
the ENGLISH TRANSLATION of the CHINESE TRIPIṬAKA
c/o Bukkyō Dendō Kyōkai (Society for the Promotion of Buddhism)
4-3-14 Shiba, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-0014, JAPAN
Tel: +81-3-3455-5851
Fax: +81-3-3798-2758
E-Mail:bdk@bdk.or.jp
URL: http://www.bdk.or.jp

9