| 🤓 Admin Zone 🛠️ hidden to non-admins | |
Description
Working from datable Chinese translations (5th–6th century) as a baseline, Skilton then marshals a series of textual citations and allusions to push the evidence further back: quotations of the SRS in Nāgārjuna's Sūtrasamuccaya (if authentic, pointing to a 2nd-century terminus), an allusion in Nāgārjuna's Acintyastava, borrowing from the SRS's "samādhi list" in a 7th-century sūtra (the Prasāntaviniścayaprātihāryasamādhisūtra), and—his most original contribution—a previously unrecognized reference to the Samādhirājasūtra by name in Asaṅga's Mahāyānasaṃgraha (c. 310–390 C.E.), which he argues has been mistranslated by Lamotte as referring to meditative states rather than scriptural titles.
Skilton concludes that at least three recensions were circulating contemporaneously by the 6th century C.E., with the "long" recension (SRS I) attested by Candrakīrti's citations and confirmed by the 7th-century Prasāntaviniścayaprātihāryasamādhisūtra's borrowings. If Asaṅga's reference specifically denotes the recension known as the Samādhirājasūtra (as opposed to the Candrapradīpasamādhisūtra), the date for that recension could be pushed back to the 4th century C.E.—considerably earlier than the 11th–12th century dates of the earliest surviving Sanskrit manuscripts (SRS I and SRS II respectively).
