Comprehensive Study on the Daichidoron : Its Origin and Influence on Chinese Buddhism

1. Kato has found brief but complete quotations of the『十住』、the『百論』、and the『弥勒』etc, which are also translated by Kumirajiva in the Daichidoron. By investigating how Kumarajiva's translations are quoted in the Daichidoron, it will become clear to what extent he is concerned with this text. It is also sure that only by the investigation of the quotations in the Daichidoron., we can nat survey its author problem.2. Takeda claims that it is necessary for this problem to clarify what is the genuine theme of the Daichidoron.3. Saito has discussed differences between the Daichidoron and the Mula-madhyamaka-karika.4. Wada has more deeply clarified the Vaisesika thought presented by the Padlctha-dharma samgraha. This clarification helps to understand the Daichidoron.5. By comparing the Daichidoron and the Sutras belonging to the Maitreya Group and by illustrating the figures of the Maitreya found in Central Asia, Miyaji has claimed that the Maitreya cult prevailed in various places through the Silk Road in the period.6. By using the Zoku-kosoden (『続高僧伝』), Ohno has proved that the Daichidoron was studied extensively in the period of Sui and early Tang that Kichizo (吉藏) of the Sanron (三論) School criticized the Daichidoron from a political point of view even though he often utilized this text, and that great influence of the Daichidoron eventually bore fruit in the Samadhi system of Tendai-Chigi (天台智〓). We have not arrived at the conclusive view of the author problem of the Daichidoron, but we believe that we have made an important step forward in our research on this text.

1. Kato has found brief but complete quotations of the『十住』、the『百論』、and the『弥勒』etc, which are also translated by Kumirajiva in the Daichidoron. By investigating how Kumarajiva's translations are quoted in the Daichidoron, it will become clear to what extent he is concerned with this text. It is also sure that only by the investigation of the quotations in the Daichidoron., we can nat survey its author problem.2. Takeda claims that it is necessary for this problem to clarify what is the genuine theme of the Daichidoron.3. Saito has discussed differences between the Daichidoron and the Mula-madhyamaka-karika.4. Wada has more deeply clarified the Vaisesika thought presented by the Padlctha-dharma samgraha. This clarification helps to understand the Daichidoron.5. By comparing the Daichidoron and the Sutras belonging to the Maitreya Group and by illustrating the figures of the Maitreya found in Central Asia, Miyaji has claimed that the Maitreya cult prevailed in various places through the Silk Road in the period.6. By using the Zoku-kosoden (『続高僧伝』), Ohno has proved that the Daichidoron was studied extensively in the period of Sui and early Tang that Kichizo (吉藏) of the Sanron (三論) School criticized the Daichidoron from a political point of view even though he often utilized this text, and that great influence of the Daichidoron eventually bore fruit in the Samadhi system of Tendai-Chigi (天台智〓). We have not arrived at the conclusive view of the author problem of the Daichidoron, but we believe that we have made an important step forward in our research on this text.