Some catalogues ascribe to An Shigao a second version of the *Yogācārabhūmi (separate from T607), entitled 修行[道地]經 and supposedly in six or seven juan. Demiéville declares that this tradition is certainly based upon a mistake. This tradition begins with Fajing, and is also found in KYL. Demiéville rejects it for several reasons: There is no apparent reason that An Shigao would have produced two versions of the same text; Dao’an, who wrote a commentary on T607, would have mentioned another version of the text if it existed; the term xiuxing 修行, which features in the title, is not in An Shigao’s lexicon. LDSBJ gives “impressive details about this pseudo-version”, for which it refers to the Baochang catalogue 寶唱錄and the Bie lu 別錄. Fei usually uses Bie lu 別錄 for the (Liu Song) Zhongjing bie lu 眾經別錄, but it can also refer on occasion to the catalogue of Zhi Mindu 支愍度. Demiéville suspects that in this case, it is the latter catalogue. However, this is odd, because in all other cases where LDSBJ gives dates etc. about An Shigao catalogues, it refers to the [supposed] catalogue of Zhu Shixing 朱士行. In fact, Fei frequently cites Zhi Mindu for Dharmarakṣa, and Demiéville suggests that possibly, this means that details in fact applied to the Dharmarakṣa text, with due allowance for a confusion of date (年號): for Yongkang 永康 = 167 read Yongjia . This would mean that the Zhi Mindu should also in fact apply to the Dharmarakṣa text. As a result of all this confusion, Zhisheng "did not hesitate" in KYL to declare that the Dharmarakṣa version "lost" and the An Shigao pseudo-text extant.