Source: Bie lu (DH mss)

In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, P.3747, the following title appears: 大十二門經二卷 (title #22 in the numbering given to the Bie lu manuscript in the transcription of Tan 1991). This title appears to correspond to no extant text. The title is followed by an interlinear note:

漢桓帝時安息國沙門安世高譯出

In CSZJJ, wording very close to this is part of the note used to cover the whole An Shigao list of 34 titles: 漢桓帝時。安息國沙門安世高所譯出, T2145 (LV) 6b4-5. It is noteworthy that the Da shi'er men jing is not the last title in the CSZJJ list. The verbatim correspondence of wording between these two sources raises interesting but difficult questions about the chronological priority between the Bie lu and CSZJJ. A further difficult question is whether one of the two directly borrowed from the other, or whether they drew on a common third source. Consideration of these questions must take into consideration the fact that the Bie lu, as witnessed in two Dunhuang fragments, contains a number of notes displaying such correspondences to the wording of CSZJJ.

Edit

In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, P.3747, the following title appears: 六度無極經 (title #66 in the numbering given to the Bie lu manuscript in the transcription of Tan 1991). This title obviously refers to T152. The title is followed by an interlinear note:

魏明帝時康僧會以吳主孫權孫亮世所譯出

In CSZJJ, wording almost identical to this is used in an interlinear note for the same text, and another text called the Wu pin 吳品: 魏明帝時。天竺沙門康僧會。以吳主孫權孫亮世所譯出, T2145 (LV) 7a27-b1. The verbatim correspondence of wording between these two sources raises interesting but difficult questions about the chronological priority between the Bie lu and CSZJJ. A further difficult question is whether one of the two directly borrowed from the other, or whether they drew on a common third source. Consideration of these questions must take into consideration the fact that the Bie lu, as witnessed in two Dunhuang fragments, contains a number of notes displaying such correspondences to the wording of CSZJJ.

Edit

In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, P.3747, the following title appears: 德光太子經, i.e. the Rāṣṭrapāla-paripr̥cchā T170 (title #3 in the numbering given to the Bie lu manuscript in the transcription of Tan 1991). This title is followed by an interlinear note:

太始六年(270 CE)九月卅日出

The wording of this note corresponds verbatim to an interlinear note to the same title in CSZJJ, 太始六年九月三十日出, T2145 (LV) 7c21. The verbatim correspondence of wording between these two sources raises interesting but difficult questions about the chronological priority between the Bie lu and CSZJJ. A further difficult question is whether one of the two directly borrowed from the other, or whether they drew on a common third source. Consideration of these questions must take into consideration the fact that the Bie lu, as witnessed in two Dunhuang fragments, contains a number of notes displaying such correspondences to the wording of CSZJJ.

Edit

In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, P.3747, the following title appears: 過去見在因[囙]果經四卷 (title #67 in the numbering given to the Bie lu manuscript in the transcription of Tan 1991). This title corresponds to T189. The title is followed by an interlinear note:

宋文帝時天竺摩訶乘法師求那跋陀羅以元
嘉中出沙門釋雲寶(sic!)弟子菩提法勇傅譯出

In CSZJJ, wording very close to this is part of a note used to cover a list of 13 titles: 宋文帝時。天竺摩訶乘法師求那跋陀羅。以元嘉中及孝武時。宣出諸經。沙門釋寶雲及弟子菩提法勇傳譯, T2145 (LV) 13a5-8. It is noteworthy that the Guoqu xianzai yinguo is not the last title in the CSZJJ list. The verbatim correspondence of wording between these two sources raises interesting but difficult questions about the chronological priority between the Bie lu and CSZJJ. A further difficult question is whether one of the two directly borrowed from the other, or whether they drew on a common third source. Consideration of these questions must take into consideration the fact that the Bie lu, as witnessed in two Dunhuang fragments, contains a number of notes displaying such correspondences to the wording of CSZJJ.

Edit

In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, P.3747, the following title appears: 小品經七卷 (title #20 in the numbering given to the Bie lu manuscript in the transcription of Tan 1991). An interlinear note (see below) identifies the text explicitly with Dharmarakṣa. In Sengyou's list of "missing" Dhr texts, we have this title and note: 更出小品[+經SYM]七卷, 8c13. Sengyou repeats this information when listing all versions of PP: 竺法護更出小品經七卷, 14a2. On this basis, we might tentatively identify this text with either T222, or with a (lost, supposed) Dharmarakṣa version of the Aṣṭasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā.

In the Bie lu manuscript, this title is followed by an interlinear note:

晉武帝時竺法護到西域得胡本還太
始中至懷帝永嘉二年(308 CE)以前所譯出

Note that the date given here does not accord with other external evidence about the translation of T222.

In CSZJJ, this same wording forms part of Sengyou's note covering the entire Dhr list (both parts, seen and missing): 合二件。凡一百五十四部。合三百九卷。晉武帝時。沙門竺法護。到西域得胡[梵SYM]本還。自太始中至懷帝永嘉二年[。]以[已SYM]前所譯出。祐捃摭群錄。遇護公所出更得四部。安錄先闕。今條入錄中。安公云。遭亂錄散小小錯涉。故知今之所獲審是護出也, T2145 (LV) 9b28-c4. In the Bie lu, however, it is not logical to suppose that the interlinear note in question covers any more titles than the title immediately preceding it, because the title before that (Tan#19) is 阿閦佛國經, i.e. *Lokakṣema's Akṣobhyavyūha T313, and that title is covered by its own interlinear note.

The verbatim correspondence of wording between these two sources raises interesting but difficult questions about the chronological priority between the Bie lu and CSZJJ. A further difficult question is whether one of the two directly borrowed from the other, or whether they drew on a common third source. Consideration of these questions must take into consideration the fact that the Bie lu, as witnessed in two Dunhuang fragments, contains a number of notes displaying such correspondences to the wording of CSZJJ.

Edit

In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, P.3747, the following title appears: 稱揚諸佛功德經一卷 (title #25 in the numbering given to the Bie lu manuscript in the transcription of Tan 1991). This title corresponds to T434. The title is followed by an interlinear note ascribing the text to Kumārajīva:

晉安帝時天竺鳩摩羅什于逍遙園譯出

In the present Taishō, T434 is ascribed to Jijiaye.

In CSZJJ, it seems likely that this wording is echoed in Sengyou's note to his full list of 35 titles for Kumārajīva: 右三十五部。凡二百九十四卷。晉安帝時。天竺沙門鳩摩羅什。以偽秦姚興弘始三年至長安。於大寺及逍遙園譯出, T2145 (LV) 11a25-27. It is noteworthy that T434 is not the last title in the CSZJJ list (though it does appear earlier in the list, at 11a3). The verbatim correspondence of wording between these two sources raises interesting but difficult questions about the chronological priority between the Bie lu and CSZJJ. A further difficult question is whether one of the two directly borrowed from the other, or whether they drew on a common third source. Consideration of these questions must take into consideration the fact that the Bie lu, as witnessed in two Dunhuang fragments, contains a number of notes displaying such correspondences to the wording of CSZJJ.

Edit

In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, P.3747, the following title appears: 魔逆經 (title #10 in the numbering given to the Bie lu manuscript in the transcription of Tan 1991). This title corresponds to T589. The title is followed by an interlinear note:

大康十年(289 CE)十二月二日出

This date corresponds with that recorded in a short document transmitted in CSZJJ, the "Moji jing ji" 魔逆經記, T2145 (LV) 50b6-10. The verbatim correspondence of wording between these two sources raises interesting but difficult questions about the chronological priority between the Bie lu and CSZJJ. A further difficult question is whether one of the two directly borrowed from the other, or whether they drew on a common third source. Consideration of these questions must take into consideration the fact that the Bie lu, as witnessed in two Dunhuang fragments, contains a number of notes displaying such correspondences to the wording of CSZJJ.

Edit

In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, P.3747, the following title appears: 大淨法門品經 (title #5 in the numbering given to the Bie lu manuscript in the transcription of Tan 1991). This title corresponds to T817. The title is followed by an interlinear note:

建始元年(301 CE)三月廿六日出

The wording of this note corresponds verbatim to an interlinear note to the same title in CSZJJ, 太始六年九月三十日出, T2145 (LV) 7c16. The verbatim correspondence of wording between these two sources raises interesting but difficult questions about the chronological priority between the Bie lu and CSZJJ. A further difficult question is whether one of the two directly borrowed from the other, or whether they drew on a common third source. Consideration of these questions must take into consideration the fact that the Bie lu, as witnessed in two Dunhuang fragments, contains a number of notes displaying such correspondences to the wording of CSZJJ.

Edit

In the "Liu Song" Zhongjing bie lu 劉宋眾經別錄, as represented by a Dunhuang manuscript fragment, S.2872, the following title is given (numbering of Bie lu titles follows Tan 1991): 察微王經一卷. This title probably corresponds to T152(90). This indicates that at the time of the Bie lu, this title was in independent circulation. Dating of the Bie lu is a complex matter; see other CBC@ entries.

Edit