Source: Mei 1996

The eighteen texts listed in this entry, Mei observes, are ascribed to Dharmarakṣa in the present Taishō, but not by CSZJJ. The majority of these texts, Mei suggests, did already exist at Sengyou's time, but Sengyou listed them as anonymous. Thus, Mei argues that further research is required to determine whether or not these texts really are by Dharmarakṣa.

Edit

54-55 n. 27

Mei begins with the 76 texts ascribed to Dharmarakṣa in the present Taishō which also appear in Sengyou. She then eliminates eight for the following reasons: five are listed as lost by Sengyou's time (T182, T288, T496, T558, T1301); T1301, moreover, contains details that makes it appear as if it may have been composed in China; T103 and T453 have been regarded as dubious by modern scholars (Gao Mingdao and Yinshun); and Sengyou's description of the 佛為菩薩五夢經 that he ascribes to Dharmarakṣa does not match T310(4). This leaves 68 texts Mei thinks can reliably be matched against Sengyou. This entry lists those 68 texts. [Note: Mei erroneously gives the number T627 for what is properly T636---MR.]

Edit

54 n. 26

Mei says that the translation idiom of T606 and T186 differ greatly, and asserts [without further argument] that this is because the amanuenses 筆錄 were different: Fasheng 法乘 for T606, but Kang Shu 康殊 and Bo Faju 帛法巨 for T186.

Edit

58 n. 53

Mei reports that the canon contains two supposed versions of the 須摩提菩薩經 (T334, T335), one ascribed to Dharmarakṣa, and one to Kumārajīva. However, the two resemble one another too closely to be the work of separate translators, and are separated only by variants introduced in scribal transmission. Mei prefers the ascription to Dharmarakṣa for both.

Edit

55

This text does not contain the usual closing formula, but Mei argues that this is because the reciter forgot the second half of the text, referring to the colophon preserved in CSZJJ [於京師遇西國寂志從出此經。經後尚有數品。其人忘失... T2145:55.51b9-10.

Edit

61-62

This is one of five Dharmarakṣa texts that Mei says CSZJJ lists as lost (which still nonetheless exist in the present canon). Mei says that CSZJJ does not list this title, but a note under the title 虎耳經 says that it is also called the 二十八宿經 [sic!; CSZJJ: 舍頭諫太子二十八宿經一卷(舊錄云舍頭諫經一名虎耳) T2145:55.25b21---MR]. Mei suggests that the present text is problematic. It includes Chinese personal names, material objects, and fruits from the south of China, and Mei says that for this reason, it is "highly possible" that it is not Dharmarakṣa's work.

Edit

53