| Identifier | [None] |
| Title | Er Qin lu 二秦錄 [Fei 597] |
| Date | [None] |
| Author | Sengrui 僧叡 [Fei 597] |
| Preferred? | Source | Pertains to | Argument | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
No |
[Fei 597] Fei Changfang 費長房. Lidai sanbao ji (LDSBJ) 歷代三寶紀 T2034. — T2034 (XLIX) 57b17, 75c5-6, 75c19, 76a13, 77b26, 127c3 |
In LDSBJ, Fei Zhangfang lists the Er Qin lu by Sengrui as one of the earlier catalogues that were his sources: 釋僧叡二秦錄一卷[19](後秦) [-- SP], T2034 (XLIX) 127c3. On five other occasions, he uses the wording "Sengrui's Er Qin lu" 僧叡二秦錄 to refer to this work. Entry author: Michael Radich |
|
|
|
No |
[Kimura 1986] Kimura Senshō 木村宣彰. "Kumarajū no yakukyō 鳩摩羅什の訳経." Ōtani daigaku kenkyū nenpō 大谷大学研究年報 38 (1986): 59-135. |
Kimura argues that the record of 24 texts ascribed to Kumārajīva in LDSBJ, supposedly from the Er Qin lu 二秦錄, should be the most reliable source available about Kumārajīva's work (see separate entry on LDSBJ’s reports about Kj’s works in the Er Qin lu). Although many scholars consider reports about the Er Qin lu, preserved in the Lidai sanbao ji 歷代三寶記 T2034 and Datang neidian lu 大唐內典錄 T2149, to be unreliable, Kimura argues that it is an important and reliable source, because its author, Sengrui 僧叡, was a close disciple of Kumārajīva and witnessed the translation activities directly. Entry author: Chia-wei Lin |
|
|
|
No |
[Kimura 1986] Kimura Senshō 木村宣彰. "Kumarajū no yakukyō 鳩摩羅什の訳経." Ōtani daigaku kenkyū nenpō 大谷大学研究年報 38 (1986): 59-135. |
Kimura analyses various items of external evidence relating to the date and process of translation for the Shi’ermen lun 十二門論 T1568: T2059, T2149 and T2034 do not give any information concerning the date of translation. T1568 is not recorded in the Er Qin lu 二秦錄 [as reported in LDSBJ], even though Sengrui 僧叡 was the author of a preface to the text, on the one hand, and the reputed compiler of the catalogue, on the other hand. The record 弘始十年(408 CE)於大寺出 in T2154 and 以大秦弘始年於逍遙園中 in the Shi’ermen lun zong zhiyi ji 十二門論中致義記 T1826 contradict each other [especially regarding the place of translation], and both seem to be baseless. There is a possibility that the preface is apocryphal and, according to Xuji gujin Fodao lunheng 續集古今佛道論衡 T2105 and Kamata Shigeo 謙田茂雄, that T1568 was translated when Kumārajīva was in Liangzhou 涼州. [On the other hand, if the preface is genuine, this conflict may have implications for the authenticity of the Er Qin lu --- MR.] Entry author: Chia-wei Lin |
|
|
|
No |
[Fei 597] Fei Changfang 費長房. Lidai sanbao ji (LDSBJ) 歷代三寶紀 T2034. — T2034 (XLIX) 127c3, c16-17 |
Fei cites Er Qin lu liberally for Kumarajiva's works [and those of various other figures/groups --- MR], but he lists the same catalogue as one of those that he himself could not lay eyes on: 右二十四家錄檢傳記有目。並未嘗見故列之於後。使傳萬世. Entry author: Sharon Chi |
|
|
|
No |
[Tan 1991] Tan Shibao 譚世保. Han Tang Foshi tanzhen 漢唐佛史探真. Guangzhou: Zhongshan daxue chubanshe, 1991. — 20 |
Tan reports that several catalogues cited by Fei Zhangfang in LDSBJ are supposed to have been compiled at a date earlier than the translation dates of the scriptures they recorded. Appealing on this basis to one of the principles that Liang Qichao proposed for recognizing forgeries, Tan thus questions the authenticity of the following catalogues: - 古錄 Entry author: Sharon Chi |
|