Source: Zhisheng 730

DTNDL ascribe these six texts to *Jñānagupta, but Jingmai to Dharmagupta. Zhisheng follows DTNDL.
護國菩薩經
佛華嚴入如來德智經
大方等大雲請雨經 (cf. T992, T993)
東方最勝燈王如來經
無所有菩薩經
大乘三聚懺悔經
已上六部內典錄云崛多所譯靖邁經圖云笈多出今依內典為正.

Edit

T2154:55.550b22-24; cf. Wang (1999/2005): 130-131.

Zhisheng identified these thirty-five Sanjie jiao texts as spurious, and states directly that they were authored by Xinxing 隋真寂寺沙門信行撰.

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

A notice for the Erbailiushi jie heiyi 二百六十戒合異 in LDSBJ ascribes the text to Zhu Falan 竺法蘭 under the Han; T2034 (XLIX) 50a8. However, this misascription was corrected by Zhisheng in KYL, who showed it was an error for Tanwulan 曇無蘭.

Edit

T2154 (LV) 649a9-15

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154 (LV) 653b15-16

Edit

T2154:55.550b22-24

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154 (LV) 654a5

This note is discussed in Kajiyoshi (1944/1980) 68-69. The text had been confused by bibliographers between Dao'an and Zhisheng with 摩訶般若鈔經 T226, ascribed to Dharmamitra and Zhu Fonian, but Zhisheng shows that he is clearly aware that it was in fact a version of the Pañcaviṃśatikāsāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā, and was no longer extant by his time. It therefore differs in content from T226, which is, in fact, an alternate translation of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā.
沙門曇摩蜱。秦言法愛。印度人。器宇明敏志存弘喻。以符堅建元十八年壬午。譯般若鈔經一部。佛護譯傳(佛護即佛圖羅剎也)慧進筆受。安公校定。共傳云。與大品放光光讚同本者。或恐尋之未審也。

Edit

T2154:55.511a22-26

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

In Juan 1 (catalog of translations from the Han and Wei dynasties), Zhisheng lists a Xulai jing in a list of five translations which he attributes to Bai Yan 白延 (487a16). Following LJSBJ, he gives the title with the character cha 叉 in front: 叉須賴經, correcting Sengyou’s you~ 又須賴. Zhisheng reproduces verbatim (and apparently, with approval) a note from LDSBJ claiming that this information relies on Sengyou and Zhu Daozu’s catalog (見竺道祖及僧祐錄; cf. LDSBJ T2034 [XLIX] 56c11). Zhisheng claims that all five texts are lost 其本並闕 (487a21).

In Juan 2 (catalog of translations from Wu and Jin dynasties) Zhisheng lists a Xulai jing in the catalog of eighty-eight translations attributed to Zhi Qian (488c21). He points out that an alternative title of this text is Xulai pusa jing 須賴菩薩經. He refers to this version as ‘the third’ translation of this scripture, and cites the Bielu and Zhu Daozu catalogs, as well as the CSZJJ, as his sources.

Also in Juan 2, in the section on translators from the Jin dynasty, Zhisheng gives a list of 55 anonymous texts (essentially copying content from Dao’an’s catalog of 142 anonymous texts, and claiming that for 87 out of 142 items in this catalog new attributions have become known since Dao’an’s time). Among the 55 texts that are still anonymous, Zhisheng lists 36 as lost. In this category he places a ‘small’ Xulai jing 小須賴經一卷 (502a13).

In Juan 4, in the section on translations from the Former Liang regime, Zhisheng lists a Xulai jing in the entry on four translations attributed to Zhi Shilun 支施崙. He calls this Zhi Shilun translation the third translation of the Xulai jing, after Bai Yan and Zhi Qian, and before Guṇabhadra.

This entry in KYL copies verbatim most of the content of the anonymous postface to the Shoulengyan translation preserved in the CSZJJ (519a23-b2; cf. T2145 [LV] 49b18-29 ). One remarkable difference is that at the end of this entry, Zhisheng asserts that this entry was composed based on a ‘colophon to the Xulai jing and colophon to the Shoulengyan jing’ 出須賴經後記及首楞嚴經後記. We have no evidence that would corroborate the existence at any point in time of an independent colophon to the Xulai jing.

Here Zhisheng also asserts that of Zhi Shilun’s four translations, the Xulai jing is the only one that survives, or ‘was seen’ 見在 by Zhisheng (519a22), while the other three are ‘missing’ 闕本. This is the text he will list in the Ruzang lu section (see below).
The entry on Zhi Shilun is followed by a parenthetical note: ‘These were all re-translations done in the Former Liang. They were presented at a later time [?], and [I] was fortunate enough to be able to list them here in an appendix’ 前涼之代 應更出經 後進遇之 幸續編附 (519b3).

In Juan 5, in the catalog of translations from the (Liu) Song dynasty, Zhisheng attributes one Pinzi Xulai jing 貧子須賴經 to Guṇabhadra, in a list of 52 texts (in the 26 lost texts subcategory), citing ‘Li Kuo's catalog,’ and evidently relying on LDSBJ, which was the first bibliographic work to make this assertion. Zhisheng calls this the fourth translation (528b25).

In Juan 12, in a listing of all extant and non-anonymous works from the ‘Bodhisattva canon,’ Zhisheng asserts that out of the four Xulai jing translations listed above, only the ‘Zhi Shilun’ translation still survives (601a18-20).

In Juan 14, In the section on non-anonymous ‘Mahāyāna’ translations that are missing 闕本, Zhisheng reiterates the claim that three of the four Xulai jing texts are lost (this calculation does not include the ‘small’ Xulai jing mentioned before), which implies that the only surviving one is the ‘Zhi Shilun translation’ (631a7-13).

In Juan 19 and 20, being the Ruzang lu section (list of texts to be included in the zang), only one Xulai jing is listed: the ‘Zhi Shilun’ translation in 18 sheets 紙 (686b9, 709a18).

Edit

T2154 (LV) 487a16, 487a21, 488c21, 502a13, 519a23-b2, 519a22, 519b3, 528b25, 601a18-20, 631a7-13, 686b9, 709a18

Jingmai recorded these three texts under the names of both Dharmagupta and *Jñānagupta. Zhisheng regarded this as an error, and removed the ascription to Dharmagupta.
大集譬喻王經
移識經
法炬陀羅尼經
已上三部經圖之中崛多笈多二錄俱載者誤也今並載崛多之錄笈多錄內除之.

Edit

T2154:55.550b22-24; cf. Wang (1999/2005): 130-131.

Zhisheng points out that in CSZJJ and LDSBJ, the title 新微密持經 is treated as a separate text, but argues that in fact, it is an alternate title for T1012 [so that this treatment creates a "ghost text"]. Cf. Bagchi (1927): 345.

出生無量門持經一卷(或云新微密持經於廬山譯第五出與支經無量門微密持經等同本見祖祐二錄祐房等錄別存新微密持經誤也).

Edit

T2154 (LV) 505b22-23

Translated by *Saṃghabhadra 僧伽跋陀羅 and Sengyi 僧禕 in 488-489 永明六年 in the Veṇuvana monastery 竹林寺 in Canton 廣州. Cf. Pinte (2010): 435 n. 1. In fact, this ascription (including other details) is first seen in LDSBJ.
以律藏付弟子僧伽跋陀羅。跋陀以武帝永明六年戊辰(房云己巳)共沙門僧禕。於廣州竹林寺譯出。名為善見律毘婆沙.

Edit

T2154:55.535c21-23

Zhisheng says that four translations of this text are supposed to have been produced at various times, of which only T1551 was extant by his time. The four are:
阿毘曇心, Saṃghadeva 僧伽提婆;
雜阿毘曇心, Faxian and 法顯 Buddhabhadra 覺賢;
雜阿毘曇心十, Īśvara 伊葉波羅 "et al." 等 [including Guṇavarman 求那跋摩];
"雜心", Saṃghavarman 僧伽䟦摩.
Dessein (1999) discusses this information (1:lxxi, 3:25 n. 360). He remarks, after Willemen, that it is unlikely that the Saṃghadeva text was the same work as T1551.

Edit

T2154:55.649b23-c6

Zhisheng says that the text is accompanied by a "forged preface" 兼有偽序. He says that the text was actually "forged" 偽造 by the "Three Stages" monk Shili 師利 in the year Jinglong 1 景龍元年 (707). "The preface claims, baselessly, that [the text] was translated by...the Trepiṭaka Bodhiruci, the Trepiṭaka *Maṇicinta et al. ....Note from the author of the present catalogue: I myself once asked the Trepiṭaka Bodhiruci directly about this matter, and the Trepiṭaka replied, 'There never was any such Sanskrit text in my possession, and I never translated this sūtra..."
右一經。即舊偽錄中像法決疑經前文增加二品共成一經。初云佛臨涅槃為阿難說法住滅品。此品乃取奘法師所譯佛臨涅槃記法住經。改換增減置之於首。次是地藏菩薩讚歎法身觀行品。後是常施菩薩所問品。此品即是舊經。據其文勢次第不相聯貫。景龍元年三階僧師利偽造。序中妄云。三藏菩提流志三藏寶思惟等於崇福寺同譯。師利云有梵夾流志曾不見聞。以舊編入偽中。再造望蠲疑錄。偽上加偽訛舛尤多。目閱可知不勞廣敘(撰錄者曰余曾以此事親問流志三藏三藏□云吾邊元無梵夾不曾翻譯此經三藏弟子般若丘多識量明敏具委其事恐時代綿遠謬濫真詮故此指明以誡於後其僧師利因少鬪訟聖躬親慮特令還俗豈非上天不祐降罰斯人又臨終之時腹大如瓮惡徵遄及可不懼歟).

Edit

T2154:55.672b29-c14

Edit

T2154 (LV) 653b18

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

Edit

T2154:55.678b7-c27

LDSBJ says that after his arrival in Chang'an in 265, Dharmarakṣa translated a first, shorter version of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka by this title. However, Zhisheng regards this as an error produced by treating the transcribed title and the translated title as separate texts. 薩芸芬陀利經六卷. 西晉三藏竺法護太始年譯(第二譯。謹按長房等錄。其正法華是竺法護。太康七年譯。見聶道真錄復云太始元年譯。薩芸芬陀利經六卷。出竺道祖錄同是一經不合再出。名目既殊本復存沒。未詳所以。或可薩芸芬陀利是梵語。正法華是晉名。梵晉俱存。錄家誤也).

Edit

T2154:55.628c23-26