貞元新定釋教目錄 27.10

27.10

菩薩境界奮迅法門經十卷
　元魏三藏菩提留支譯　出寶唱錄
右一經即薩遮尼乾子經之異名。周錄別
載。復云闕本者誤也。
新道行經十卷（或七卷）
　西晉三藏竺法護譯（出長房等錄）
右一經撿諸藏本。並與小品般若文句全
同者其本錯也。護公所譯新道行經。時無
其本。
承聞東都有護本。求尋之未獲譯。
大方等大集經八卷
右一經。唐內典錄及大周錄俱載。今撿其
文即是合部大集經第六帙也。初之二卷
名十方菩薩品。即是明度五十校計經。後
之六卷乃是無盡意經。其明度五十校計
經不知何故編入大集。以有差殊今存別
部之者。此既重載。今故刪除。
阿耨達龍王經二卷
右一經與弘道廣顯三昧經文句全同。但
名別異。今存一本。
合道神足經三卷
右一經與道神足無極變化經文同名異。
哀泣經三卷（或二卷六品）
右一經。與方等般泥洹經文同名異。其方
等泥洹初品名為哀泣。乃取此品名目以
作經題。比於方等泥洹。後闕三品文不足
矣。
寶田慧印三昧經一卷
右一經。與慧印三昧經文句全同名廣略
異。長房錄云慧印三昧經。亦名寶田慧印
三昧經。周入藏錄二本俱載。一單一重誤
之甚也。
鹿子經一卷
右一經。與鹿母經文同名異。據其文義合
從母立。長房錄云鹿子經。吳代優婆塞支
謙譯者謬也。
小無量壽經一卷
右一經。與阿彌陀經文同名異。其宋代三
藏求那跋陀羅所譯小無量壽經。時無其
本。
胎藏經一卷
右一經。與無垢賢女經文同名異。
聞城十二因緣經一卷
右一經。與貝多樹下思惟十二因緣經文
同名異。此聞城經合有異本。尋之未獲。
大安般經一卷（或二卷內典錄云二卷長房錄云一卷）
右一經。與大安般守意經文句全同名廣
略異。群錄之中存其二本誤之甚也。
申日經一卷
右一經。與大乘藏中月光童子經文同名
異。父名申日子號月光。約此不同立經名
別。長房錄云申日經吳代優婆塞支謙譯
者謬也。
輪轉五道罪福報應經一卷
右一經與罪福報應經文句全同名廣略異。
栴陀越經一卷
右一經。與栴陀越國王經文句全同名廣
略異。周入藏中栴陀越經編在單本。栴陀
越國王經在於重譯。二處俱載者誤之甚
也。
真偽沙門經一卷（長房錄一名摩訶比丘經亦名迦葉禁戒經）
右一經。即迦葉禁戒經之異名文句全同。
或云宋代鹿野寺沙門慧簡譯者謬也。
轉法輪經一卷
右一經撿無其本。諸經藏內皆以轉法輪
論替之者誤也。近於東都尋得正本編入
藏記。
賓頭盧為王說法經一卷
右一經與賓盧突羅闍為優陀延王說法
經文句全同名廣略異。
阿蘭若習禪法經二卷
右一經與坐禪三昧經文同名異。
禪祕要經五卷
右一經。云是宋代三藏曇摩蜜多譯。云與
姚秦三藏鳩摩羅什譯祕要法同本異出。
今撿尋上下文極錯非是本經。初之一卷
乃是治禪病祕要法文。仍不盡至半而止。
第二卷已去即是羅什所譯禪祕要法。從
第一卷過半生起至第三卷末文亦不盡。
欠十紙餘均為四卷。通前成五。其曇摩蜜
多譯者時闕其本。

Bodhisattva-gocara-vikurvaṇa-nirdeśa-sūtra, ten fascicles.
Translated by the Tripiṭaka master Bodhiruci of the Northern Wei; from the catalogue of Baochang.
The one scripture above is an alternate title for the Saccaka-nirgrantha-sūtra. The Zhou catalogue listed it separately and further claimed that the text was lacking, which is an error.

New Daoxing jing, ten fascicles (or seven fascicles).
Translated by the Tripiṭaka master Dharmarakṣa of the Western Jin (from the catalogue of Fei Zhangfang and others).
The one scripture above: upon examining the various canon copies, they were all completely identical in phrasing to the Aṣṭasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra, which is an error in those copies. The New Daoxing jing translated by Master Dharmarakṣa currently lacks an extant text.
I have heard that in the Eastern Capital there is a copy of Dharmarakṣa's [translation], but searching for it has not yielded it.

Mahāvaipulya Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra, eight fascicles.
The one scripture above is recorded in both the Tang Neidian lu and the Great Zhou catalogue. Now upon examining its text, it is simply the sixth case of the combined Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra. The first two fascicles are titled "Chapter of the Bodhisattvas of the Ten Directions," which is the Mingdu wushi jiaoji jing. The latter six fascicles are the Akṣayamati-sūtra. As for the Mingdu wushi jiaoji jing, for unknown reasons it was compiled into the Mahāsaṃnipāta. Because of discrepancies, it is now retained as an independent work. Since this was entered redundantly, it is now eliminated.

Anavatapta-nāgarāja-sūtra, two fascicles.
The one scripture above is completely identical in phrasing with the Hongdao guangxian sanmei jing, differing only in title. Now one text is retained.

Hedao shenzu jing, three fascicles.
The one scripture 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 scripture above is identical in text and different in title from the Mahāvaipulya Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra. The first chapter of the Vaipulya Nirvāṇa is titled "Lamentation" (Aiqi), and taking this chapter title, it was made into a scripture title. Compared to the Vaipulya Nirvāṇa, it lacks the latter three chapters and the text is incomplete.

Baotian huiyin sanmei jing, one fascicle.
The one scripture above is completely identical in phrasing with the Huiyin sanmei jing, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title. Zhangfang's catalogue states that the Huiyin sanmei jing is also called the Baotian huiyin sanmei jing. The Zhou Canon Catalogue recorded both texts, one as a single translation and one as a retranslation, which is a gross error.

Luzi jing, one fascicle.
The one scripture above is identical in text and different in title from the Lumu jing. According to its textual meaning, it should properly be established based on "mother." Zhangfang's catalogue stating that the Luzi jing was translated by the upāsaka Zhi Qian of the Wu dynasty is an error.

Xiao Wuliangshou jing, one fascicle.
The one scripture above is identical in text and different in title from the Amitābha-sūtra. As for the Xiao Wuliangshou jing translated by the Tripiṭaka master Guṇabhadra of the Song dynasty, there is currently no extant text.

Taizang jing, one fascicle.
The one scripture above is identical in text and different in title from the Wugouxiannü jing.

Wencheng shier yinyuan jing, one fascicle.
The one scripture above is identical in text and different in title from the Beiduoshu xia siwei shier yinyuan jing. This Wencheng jing ought to have a distinct text, but searching for it has not yielded it.

Great Ānāpāna Sūtra, one fascicle (or two fascicles; the Neidian lu says two fascicles, and Zhangfang's catalogue says one fascicle).
The one scripture above is completely identical in phrasing with the Da anban shouyi jing, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title. Various catalogues retaining both texts is a gross error.

Shenri jing, one fascicle.
The one scripture above is identical in text and different in title from the Candraprabha-kumāra-sūtra in the Mahāyāna canon. The father's name was Shenri (Sūryagupta) and the son was titled Candraprabha; based on this difference, distinct titles were assigned to the scripture. Zhangfang's catalogue stating that the Shenri jing was translated by the upāsaka Zhi Qian of the Wu dynasty is an error.

Lunzhuan wudao zuifu baoying jing, one fascicle.
The one scripture above is completely identical in phrasing with the Zuifu baoying jing, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title.

Zhantuoyue jing, one fascicle.
The one scripture above is completely identical in phrasing with the Zhantuoyue guowang jing, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title. In the Zhou Canon Catalogue, the Zhantuoyue jing was compiled under single translations, while the Zhantuoyue guowang jing was placed under retranslations. Recording it in both places is a gross error.

Zhenwei shamen jing, one fascicle (Zhangfang's catalogue notes: also titled Mohe biqiu jing, and also titled Jiaye jinjie jing).
The one scripture above is an alternate title of the Jiaye jinjie jing, and the phrasing is completely identical. Those who say it was translated by the śramaṇa Huijian of Luye Monastery during the Song dynasty are mistaken.

Dharmacakrapravartana-sūtra, one fascicle.
Upon examining the one scripture above, its text was not extant. In the various scriptural canons, it was erroneously replaced with the Dharmacakrapravartana-śāstra. Recently, in the Eastern Capital, the authentic text was found and compiled into the canon catalogue.

Pinzholu wei wang shuofa jing, one fascicle.
The one scripture above is completely identical in phrasing with the Pinlutuluozhe wei youtuoyan wang shuofa jing, differing only in having an expanded or abridged title.

Aranya-xichanfa jing, two fascicles.
The one scripture above is identical in text and different in title from the Zuohan sanmei jing.

Chan miyao jing, five fascicles.
The one scripture above is said to have been translated by the Tripiṭaka master Dharmamitra of the Song dynasty, and is said to be an alternate translation from the same source text as the Miyao fa translated by the Tripiṭaka master Kumārajīva of the Later Qin. Now, upon examining and searching the text from beginning to end, it is extremely corrupt and is not the original scripture. The first fascicle is in fact the text of the Zhi chanbing miyao fa, yet it is incomplete, breaking off midway. From the second fascicle onward, it is the Chan miyao fa translated by Kumārajīva; starting past the midpoint 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 arbitrarily divided into four fascicles, making five together with the preceding. As for the translation by Dharmamitra, its text is currently lacking.