開元釋教錄 17.9

17.9

*Pusa jingjie fenxun famen jing*, ten fascicles; translated by Bodhiruci, Tripiṭaka master of the Northern Wei (attested in Baochang's catalogue).
The one sūtra above is another name for the *Sache niganzi jing*. The Zhou catalogue listed it separately and furthermore called it a lost text, which is an error.
*Xin daoxing jing*, seven fascicles (or ten fascicles); translated by Dharmarakṣa, Tripiṭaka master of the Western Jin (attested in Changfang's and other catalogues).
Regarding the one sūtra above, when examining the various canon copies, all were completely identical in text and phrasing with the *Xiaopin bore*, so that text is mistaken. There is currently no copy of the *Xin daoxing jing* translated by Dharmarakṣa (I have heard that there is a copy translated by Dharmarakṣa in the Eastern Capital, but upon searching for it I have not obtained it).
*Dafangdeng daji jing*, eight fascicles.
Regarding the one sūtra above, the Tang *Neidian lu* and the *Da Zhou lu* both list it. Now upon examining its text, it is none other than the sixth case of the combined *Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra*. The first two fascicles are called the "Chapter of the Bodhisattvas of the Ten Directions," which is the *Mingdu wushi jiaoji jing*. The subsequent six fascicles are the *Wujinyi jing*. For what reason the *Mingdu wushi jiaoji jing* was compiled into the *Mahāsaṃnipāta* is unknown; because it differs, it is now preserved as a separate work. Since this has been doubly listed, it is now deleted.
*Anouda longwang jing*, two fascicles.
The one sūtra above is completely identical in text and phrasing with the *Hongdao guangxian sanmei jing*, differing only in title. One text is now preserved.
*Hedao shenzu jing*, three fascicles.
The one sūtra above is identical in text and different in title from the *Dao shenzu wuji bianhua jing*.
*Aiqi jing*, three fascicles (or two fascicles, six chapters).
The one sūtra above is identical in text and different in title from the *Fangdeng banniehuan jing*. The first chapter of the *Fangdeng niehuan* is called "Lamentation" (Aiqi); this chapter title was thus taken as the title of the sūtra. Compared to the *Fangdeng niehuan*, it lacks the final three chapters, making the text incomplete.
*Baotian huiyin sanmei jing*, one fascicle.
The one sūtra above is completely identical in text and phrasing with the *Huiyin sanmei jing*, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title. Changfang's catalogue states: "The *Huiyin sanmei jing* is also titled *Baotian huiyin sanmei jing*." The Zhou canon-entry catalogue listed both texts, one under single translations and one under retranslations, which is a gross error.
*Luzi jing*, one fascicle.
The one sūtra above is identical in text and different in title from the *Lumu jing*. Based on its textual meaning, it should take its title from the mother. Changfang's catalogue states that the *Luzi jing* was translated by the upāsaka Zhi Qian of the Wu dynasty, which is mistaken.
*Xiao wuliangshou jing*, one fascicle.
The one sūtra above is identical in text and different in title from the *Amituo jing*. There is currently no copy of the *Xiao wuliangshou jing* translated by Guṇabhadra, Tripiṭaka master of the Song dynasty.
*Taizang jing*, one fascicle (attested in Changfang's catalogue).
The one sūtra above is identical in text and different in title from the *Wugou xianlü jing*.
*Wencheng shi'er yinyuan jing*, one fascicle.
The one sūtra above is identical in text and different in title from the *Beidoushu xia siwei shi'er yinyuan jing*. This *Wencheng jing* ought to have had a different translation, but upon searching for it I have not obtained it.
*Da anban jing*, one fascicle (or two fascicles; the *Neidian lu* says two fascicles, Changfang's catalogue says one fascicle).
The one sūtra above is completely identical in text and phrasing with the *Da anban shouyi jing*, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title. That the various catalogues preserve both texts is a gross error.
*Shenri jing*, one fascicle.
The one sūtra above is identical in text and different in title from the *Yueguang tongzi jing* in the Mahāyāna piṭaka. The father was named Shenri, and the son was called Yueguang; the titles of the sūtra were differentiated based on this distinction. Changfang's catalogue states that the *Shenri jing* was translated by the upāsaka Zhi Qian of the Wu dynasty, which is mistaken.
*Lunzhuang wudao zuifu baoying jing*, one fascicle.
The one sūtra above is completely identical in text and phrasing with the *Zuifu baoying jing*, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title.
*Zhanduoyue jing*, one fascicle.
The one sūtra above is completely identical in text and phrasing with the *Zhanduoyue guowang jing*, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title. In the Zhou canon catalogue, the *Zhanduoyue jing* was compiled under single translations, while the *Zhanduoyue guowang jing* was under retranslations; listing them in two places is a gross error.
*Zhenwei shamen jing*, one fascicle (Changfang's catalogue states: "also titled *Mohe biqiu jing*, and also titled *Jiaye jinjie jing*").
The one sūtra above is another name for the *Jiaye jinjie jing*, and is completely identical in text and phrasing. Some say it was translated by the śramaṇa Huijian of Luye Temple during the Song dynasty, which is mistaken.
*Zhuanfalun jing*, one fascicle.
Upon examining this one sūtra, there was no copy found. That the various sūtra collections all substituted the *Zhuanfalun lun* for it was an error (recently, a correct copy was found in the Eastern Capital and has already been incorporated into the canon).
*Bintoulu wei wang shuofa jing*, one fascicle.
The one sūtra above is completely identical in text and phrasing with the *Bintoulu tuluoshe wei youdayan wang shuofa jing*, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title.
*Alanruo xi chanfa jing*, two fascicles.
The one sūtra above is identical in text and different in title from the *Zuochan sanmei jing*.
*Chan miyao jing*, five fascicles.
Regarding the one sūtra above, it is said to have been translated by Dharmamitra, Tripiṭaka master of the Song dynasty, and is said to be a different translation of the same original as the *Chan miyao fa* translated by Kumārajīva, Tripiṭaka master of the Later Qin. Now upon examining the context, the text is exceedingly confused and is not the original sūtra. The first fascicle is text from the *Zhi chanbing miyao fa*, yet it is incomplete and breaks off halfway through. From the second fascicle onwards, it is the *Chan miyao fa* translated by Kumārajīva, beginning past the middle of the first fascicle and continuing to the end of the third fascicle; its text is also incomplete, lacking more than ten sheets. It was divided into four fascicles, making five together with the preceding. As for the translation by Dharmamitra, its text is currently lost.