出三藏記集 7.32

7.32

此經本有記云。支讖所譯出。讖月支人也。漢桓靈之世。來在中國。其博學淵妙才思測微。凡所出經類多深玄。貴尚實中不存文飾。今之小品阿闍貰屯真般舟。悉讖所出也。又有支越字恭明。亦月支人也。其父亦漢靈帝之世。來獻中國。越在漢生。似不及見讖也。又支亮字紀明。資學於讖。故越得受業於亮焉。越才學深徹內外備通。以季世尚文時好簡略。故其出經頗從文麗。然其屬辭析理。文而不越。約而義顯真可謂深入者也。以漢末沸亂南度奔吳。從黃武至建興中。所出諸經凡數十卷。自有別傳記錄。亦云。出此經。今不見。復有異本也。然此首楞嚴自有小不同。辭有豐約。文有晉胡。較而尋之。要不足以為異人別出也。恐是越嫌讖所譯者辭質多胡音。異者刪而定之。其所同者述而不改。二家各有記錄耳。此一本於諸本中辭最省便。又少胡音。偏行於世。即越所定者也。至大晉之初。有沙門支法護白衣竺叔蘭。並更譯此經。求之於義互相發明。披尋三部勞而難兼。欲令學者即得其對。今以越所定者。為母護所出。為子蘭所譯者繫之。其所無者輒於其位記而別之或有文義皆同。或有義同而文有小小增減。不足重書者。亦混以為同。雖無益於大趣。分部章句差見可耳。

The original text of this sūtra has a record stating that it was translated by Lokakṣema. Lokakṣema was a man of the Yuezhi. During the reigns of Emperors Huan and Ling of the Han, he came to China. His extensive learning was profound and wondrous, and his talent and thought fathomed the subtle. Almost all the sūtras he translated were deep and profound; he prized substance and moderation and did not maintain literary embellishment. The present *Aṣṭasāhasrikā*, the *Ajātaśatru*, the *Dundubhisvara*, and the *Pratyutpanna* were all translated by Lokakṣema. There was also Zhi Qian, courtesy name Gongming, who was likewise a man of the Yuezhi. His father also came to pay tribute to China during the reign of Emperor Ling of the Han. Zhi Qian was born in the Han, and it seems he did not manage to meet Lokakṣema. Furthermore, Zhi Liang, courtesy name Jiming, studied under Lokakṣema, so Zhi Qian was able to receive instruction from Zhi Liang. Zhi Qian's talent and learning were deep and penetrating, and he was fully versed in both internal and external texts. Because the latter age valued literary style and the times favored conciseness, the sūtras he translated considerably followed literary elegance. Yet in composing phrases and analyzing principles, his style was refined without being excessive, and concise with the meaning made clear; he may truly be called one who penetrated deeply. Amid the turmoil at the end of the Han, he crossed southward and fled to Wu. From the Huangwu to the Jianxing eras [222–253 CE], the various sūtras he translated totaled several tens of fascicles, which have their own separate biographies and records. It is also said that he translated this sūtra, but today it is no longer seen, and there is another variant text. However, this *Śūraṅgama* itself has slight differences: the phrasing has abundance and brevity, and the text has Jin and Hu elements. Examining and investigating them, they are basically not enough to consider them separate translations by different hands. I suspect that Zhi Qian disliked Lokakṣema's translation for its plain language and frequent Hu sounds, so he pruned and corrected the differences, while transmitting what was identical without change. The two masters each have their own records. This single version is the most concise and convenient among the various texts, and it also has fewer Hu sounds; it circulated widely in the world and is precisely the one emended by Zhi Qian. At the beginning of the Great Jin, there were the śramaṇa Zhi Dharmarakṣa and the layman Zhu Shulan, who both retranslated this sūtra. Seeking their meaning, they mutually elucidate one another. But leafing through and investigating three texts is laborious and difficult to manage together; wishing to allow students to find the counterparts immediately, I have now taken Zhi Qian's emended version as the mother text, Dharmarakṣa's translation as the son, and attached Zhu Shulan's translation to it. Where something is lacking, I have noted and distinguished it in its place. Some passages have text and meaning that are identical, and some have identical meaning with slight additions or subtractions in the text that are not worth writing out again; these I have combined as identical. Although this is of no benefit to the overarching purport, the division of chapters and sentences can be seen reasonably clearly.