大唐內典錄 10.36

10.36

In my youth, I was bathed in the stream of the Dharma, and over fifty years have passed since then. Great masters established the teachings, providing models of worthiness and wisdom. Whenever I encountered scriptural texts or virtuous capacities, I never failed to inspect them with my own eyes or consult them in person. Regarding the great catalogues of scriptural divisions, I rejoiced and gained much understanding. Regardless of authenticity, I wished to hear of their divergences. Ever since Dongfang Shuo saw the ashes of Kunming, and Liu Xiang collated Buddhist sūtras in the Heavenly Pavilion, we know that the Zhou and Han had heard of them long ago, and it was not only after Mingdi [of the Later Han] that they flowed to this land. Thus, Zhu Falan initially produced texts, and An Shigao translated various sūtras extensively. The other traditions that followed all served to open the Way. Consequently, after the Wei and Jin dynasties, translation flourished like rising steam, and compiling catalogues and holding discussions were clearly not few. Some classified by numerical sequence, some searched by titles, some relied on historical eras, and some referred to translation ateliers. Each recorded a single corner, striving to preserve what they had seen. All of these authors possessed broad learning and enlightened discernment in their day, yet their drafting, writing, and editing did not achieve thoroughness—not because their talent was lacking or their wisdom was incomplete, but simply because in their lifetimes, the empire was fractured and divided. Borders and checkpoints were fraught with difficulties, making it impossible to peruse the scriptural collections; even though they heard of their existence, they never saw them in their entire lives. Now, the nine regions are tranquil, and the eight frontiers are joined together. I therefore abandoned all other pursuits, and how could I not compile and record them? Drawing together the numerous titles above, gathering evidence from texts such as monastic biographies, I collated and determined them in detail. I further consulted catalogues such as those of [Seng]you and [Fei Chang]fang. Sengyou's catalogue provides evidence and textual meaning that are admirable; however, the Greater and Lesser [Vehicles] are grouped together indiscriminately, the three piṭakas are intermingled, excerpted collections are mixed with orthodox texts, and records and chronicles disrupt the scriptures. Examining them from beginning to end, one cannot fully resolve them. Fei Changfang's catalogue appeared later and encompasses previous accounts; however, the Three Jewels share the same sections, and the apocryphal and authentic are mixed. As for the other various catalogues, how could they all be mentioned? Now, my compilation aims to reform earlier defects. However, at the age of seventy, working with my mind alone, checking and collecting omissions will ultimately fall into earlier errors. I merely express my intentions and show their criteria and evidence, hoping that like-minded individuals will again correct them with elegance. How could we not travel in the same boat and cherish antiquity together?