Part I:
San‑chieh Literature in the Sutra Catalogues
The study of the literary tradition of the San-chieh movement begins with the many scriptural catalogues compiled from the Sui dynasty onwards.[1] Although the literary history of the San-chieh movement has enough ambiguities to make a final, authoritative statement concerning titles and authors virtually impossible, the catalogs present a good overview of the tradition. All of the San-chieh texts found in these catalogues are no longer extant today, we do get an idea of the extent and consistency of San-chieh literary activity. These catalogues also provide historical information, remarks clarifying the content of a text, etc., which are helpful in trying to reconstruct the history and development of the sect.
Fei Chang‑fen compiled the Li tai san pao chi in 597, and it is the first catalogue to record the San-chieh literature. These entries are also important because they were recorded shortly after the death of Hsin‑hsing in 594 and are thus among the oldest datable records.[2] The Li tai san pao chi records the San-chieh literature in the twelfth chüan, or the "Chronological Catalogue:"
1. 對根起行雜錄三十二卷
2. 三階位別集錄三卷
右二部合三十五卷。真寂寺沙門釋信行撰。行魏州人。少而落采博綜群經。蘊獨見之明。顯高蹈之跡。與先舊德解行弗同。不令聲聞兼菩薩行。捨二百五十戒。居大僧下在沙彌上。門徒悉行方等。結淨頭陀乞食。日止一餐在道路行。無問男女率皆禮拜。欲似法華常不輕行。夫涅槃一理趣有萬途。譬若帝京八方奔湊。涅槃亦爾。十方皆歸。但路有艱夷。或迂或直。意迷其逕解翻成惑。心醒其途惑即為解。所以經言。眾生未成佛。以菩提為煩惱。眾生若成佛。以煩惱為菩提。信行此途。亦是萬衢之一術也。但人愛同惡異。緣是時復致譏。此錄並引經論正文。而其外題無定准的。雖曰對根起行幽隱。指體標牓於事少潛。來哲儻詳幸知有據(開皇二十年敕斷不聽流行。想同箴勗)
The first work recorded is the Tui ken ch’i hsing tsa lu in thirty-two chüan. Although there is no text of this size extant today, given the fairly consistent tradition regarding the total number of chüan of Hsin‑hsing's works it is probable that this "tsa lu" (miscellaneous collection) in 32 rolls represents all or part of the 35 works enumerated separately in the later catalogues. That is, although recorded here as a single "miscellaneous collection," these same texts later came to circulate individually, under separate titles, as enumerated in the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu and other catalogues. The second work listed is the San chieh wei pieh chi lu in three chüan, which most likely corresponds in some way to the San chieh fo fa, extant today in four chüan.
After these two entries, Fei added that both were composed by Hsin‑hsing of the Chen‑chi ssu, that Hsin‑hsing was originally from Wei‑chou, that he discarded the two-hundred-fifty precepts, and other general information about Hsin‑hsing and the San-chieh community. He also adds that the circulation (of these texts) was proscribed in 600 by Imperial order. Although the presence of this note tells us that this entry was emended some three or four years after the catalogue was composed (597), we can still consider this among the earliest records regarding the San-chieh. Another early source which supports the record of the Li tai san pao chi is Hsin‑hsing's reliquary memorial, the Ku ta Hsin‑hsing chan shih ming t'a pei, which gives the Tui ken ch’i hsing chih fa in more than 30 chüan and the San chieh fo fa in four chüan as Hsin‑hsing's works (see below, Chapter 8). Thus we can see that within a short time of Hsin‑hsing's death a tradition was established that he had composed some thirty-five chüan of texts, and that those same texts were proscribed in 600.[3]
This catalogue was composed in 664 by the famous Tao-hsüan, author of the Hsü kao seng chüan and founder of the Vinaya School in China. The San-chieh works which Tao-hsüan recorded (included in the chronological catalogue under the Sui dynasty) are substantially the same as those found in the Li tai san pao chi:
1. 對根起行雜錄集(三十六卷)
2. 三階位別錄集四卷
右二部四十卷。真寂寺沙門釋信行撰。行魏人。少而落[髟/采]。博綜群經。蘊獨見之明。顯高蹈之跡。與先舊德解行弗同。不全聲聞兼菩薩行。捨二百五十戒。居大僧下在沙彌上。門徒悉行方等結淨。投陀乞食。日止一餐。在道路行。無問男女率皆禮拜。欲似法華常不輕行。此亦萬衢之一術也。但人愛同惡異。緣之時復致譏此錄。誠並引經論正文。而其外題無定准的。雖曰對根起行幽隱。指體標榜於事少微。來哲儻詳幸知有據。開皇二十年敕斷不聽行相同箴勗。然其屬流廣海陸高之
The first entry, the Tui ken chi hsing tsa lu chi is recorded in thirty-six chüan versus the thirty-two chüan given in the Li tai san pao chi, possibly reflecting the addition of new works to this miscellaneous collection. The second work is the San chieh wei pieh lu chi in four chüan, which most likely is related to the Li tai san pao chi record of a San chieh wei pieh chi lu in three chüan. That these records correspond to those of the Li tai san pao chi is supported by the well‑known fact that Tao-hsüan used the Li tai san pao chi as the basis for the chronological catalogue of his own work. It is born out by his reliance on and inclusion of the Li tai san pao chi comments on Hsin‑hsing and the San-chieh, although somewhat shortened.[4]
Other than the slightly different number of chüan listed by Tao-hsüan, the only original part of this entry is a line at the very end, following Fei's comment on the suppression in 600: "Although [the circulation of these texts was suppressed in 600] the followers of this tradition extend to the seas and heights of the land.”[5] The fact that although Tao-hsüan follows the Li tai san pao chi almost exactly the fact that he recorded a slightly different number of chüan for each of the two works yet made no comment about their being different texts tends to support the authenticity of his record. Tao-hsüan also recorded these two works in his Hsü kao seng chüan (T.50.560a) as well as another work, the Chung shih shu fa, composed "East of the Mountains" (referring to Hsin‑hsing's time spent in Hsiang‑chou). This last work is rather curious, appearing nowhere else, not even in Tao-hsüan's own Ta t'ang nei tien lu. As Tao-hsüan recorded that Hsin‑hsing's works were only given orally until Pei Hsuang‑cheng recorded them in Ch'ang an, it is possible that this "Assembly of Teachings" composed before Hsin‑hsing came to Ch'ang‑an (i.e., when he was still "East of the Mountains") represents more or less the same works as the "Miscellaneous Collection." Tao-hsüan should be a reliable reporter, as he lived on Chung‑nan shan, the location of Hsin‑hsing's reliquary and an important site for San-chieh followers.
C. Ta Chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu
This catalogue, compiled in 695 by Ming‑ch'uan and 70 others at the orders of Empress Wu, is the first catalogue to enumerate more than two San-chieh works. This is also the first catalogue to include the San-chieh works in the catalogue of apocryphal texts (僞經 wei-ching).[6]
The Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu includes twenty-two works in a total of twenty-nine chuan:
1. 三階集錄一部四卷
2. 三階集錄一部二卷
3. 大乘驗人通行法一卷
4. 對根淺深發菩提心法一卷
5. 末法眾生於佛法內廢興所由法一卷
6. 對根淺深同異法一卷
7. 學求善知識發菩提心法一卷
8. 廣明法界眾生根機法一卷
9. 略明法界眾生根機法一卷
10. 世間出世間兩階人發菩提心法一卷
11. 十種惡具足人迴心入道法一卷
12. 行行同異法一卷
13. 當根器所行法一卷
14. 明善人惡人法一卷
15. 就佛法內明一切佛法一切 師外道法二卷
16. 三十六種對面不識錯法一卷
17. 根機普藥法二卷
18. 十大段明義二卷
19. 大乘無盡藏法一卷
20. 毘發願法一卷
21. 人情所行行法一卷
22. 大眾制一卷
右三階雜法二十二部二十九卷
奉證聖元年恩敕。令定偽經。及雜符籙等遣送祠部進內。前件教門既違背佛意。別搆異端。即是偽雜符籙之限。又准聖曆二年敕。其有學三階者。唯得乞食長齋絕穀持戒坐禪。此輒行皆是違法。幸承明敕。使革往非。不敢妄編在於目錄。並從刊削以示將來
It is probable that the various texts recorded in the miscellaneous collection (Tui ken ch’i hsing tsa lu) of the previous catalogues later came to circulate as individual texts, and that it is these texts which are recorded here.[7] There remains, however, the discrepancy between the thirty-two or thirty-six chüan of miscellaneous texts recorded earlier and the twenty-five chüan (twenty-nine chüan minus the four chüan San chieh fo fa) recorded here. If this assumption regarding the "tsa lu" is incorrect, than we would have to say that more than thirty chüan of San-chieh texts were lost and twenty-five chüan of new material were composed. It seems more reasonable that when the Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu was composed some eight chüan of texts were no longer available, at least to the compilers of the catalogue. This supposition is supported by the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu, which notes that the Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu did not completely record the San-chieh materials.[8] At any rate, these twenty-two works were included in the fifteenth chüan, the catalogue of "apocryphal sutras". Although this designation as "apocryphal" usually refers to works composed in China and falsely attributed to Indian sources, the note at the end of the entry tells us that the San-chieh works were considered heretical and contrary to the Buddha's teachings and thus included in this section by Imperial order in the year 695. The note also states that in 699 another Imperial order prohibited the San-chieh followers from practices other than begging, fasting, going without grains, vinaya, and meditation.[9] In spite of this prohibition, we know from other records that the institution of the Inexhaustible Storehouse, one of the more conspicuous practices of the San-chieh, continued to flourish (Absolute Delusion, Chs. 7-8).
This catalogue, compiled in 730 by Chih‑sheng, is generally considered to be the most complete and authoritative of the Chinese catalogues of the Buddhist scriptures. Although, unlike the Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu, this catalogue contains both a chronological catalogue and various catalogues arranged by content, number of translations, etc., the San-chieh materials are left completely out of the chronological catalogue and are placed in the 18th chüan, the catalogue of apocryphal works.[10] This catalogue enumerates thirty-five works in a total of forty-four chüan, an increase of thirteen works and fifteen chüan from the records of the Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu:
1. 三階佛法四卷(內典錄云三階別集四卷者即此是)
2. 十大段明義三卷(長房錄云三階別集三卷者即此是)
3. 根機普藥法二卷(大周錄中除此之外更有三階集錄二卷者誤)
4. 三十六種對面不識錯法一卷(明一切三十六種對面不識錯)
5. 右三階法都有四部。初是四卷三階。次是三卷三階。三是兩卷三階。後是一卷三階。後之三本入集錄數
6. 大乘驗人通行法一卷
7. 對根淺深發菩提心法一卷(上加明諸經中四字)
8. 對根淺深同異法一卷(同前加四字)
9. 末法眾生於佛法內廢興所由法一卷(上加明諸經中對根淺深八字)
10. 學求善知識發菩提心法一卷(明世間五濁惡世界末法惡時十惡眾生福德下行於此四種具足人中謂當三乘器人依諸大乘經論學求善知識學發菩提心一卷)
11. 廣明法界眾生根機法一卷(廣明法界眾生根機上下起行淺深法)
12. 略明法界眾生根機法一卷(略明法界眾生根機上下起行淺深法)
13. 世間出世間兩階人發菩提心法一卷(明諸大乘修多羅內世間出世間兩階人發菩提心同異法)
14. 世間十種惡具足人迴心入道法一卷(明十種惡具足人內最惡人[廷-壬+(同-(一/口)+巳)]心入道者斷惡修善法也)
15. 行行同異法一卷(明世間出世間人行行同異法)
16. 當根器所行法一卷(明佛滅度第二五百年以後一切最大顛倒最大邪見最大惡眾生當根器所行法)
17. 明善人惡人多少法一卷(明佛滅度一千五百年以後善人惡人多)
18. 就佛法內明一切佛法一切六師外道法二卷(就一切佛法內明一切佛法六師外道法同異)
19. 明大乘無盡藏法一卷
20. 明諸經中發願法一卷
21. 略發願法一卷
22. 明人情行法一卷
23. 大眾制法一卷
24. 敬三寶法一卷(明諸經中對根起行淺深敬三寶法)
25. 對根起行法一卷(明一切眾生對根上下起行法於內有五段)
26. 頭陀乞食法一卷(依諸經論略抄頭陀乞食法)
27. 明乞食八門法一卷
28. 諸經要集二卷
29. 十輪依義立名二卷(大方廣十輪經學依義立名)
30. 十輪略抄一卷(大方廣十輪經入集錄略抄出)
31. 大集月藏分依義立名一卷(大集月藏分經明像法中要行法人集錄略抄依義立名)
32. 大集月藏分抄一卷(大集月藏分經明像法中要行法人集錄略抄出)
33. 月燈經要略一卷
34. 迦葉佛藏抄一卷(明一切出家人內最惡出家人斷惡修善法如迦葉佛藏經說)
35. 廣七階佛名一卷(觀藥王藥上菩薩經佛名一卷)
36. 略七階佛名一卷(已上三階法等於中多題人集錄字其廣題目具如腳注)
右三階法及雜集錄。總三十五部四十四卷。隋真寂寺沙門信行撰(長房錄云總三十五卷內典錄云都四十卷大周偽錄但載二十二部二十九卷並收不盡其三階興教碑云四十餘卷而不別列部卷篇目今細搜括具件如上)
信行所撰雖引經文皆黨其偏見妄生穿鑿。既乖反聖旨復冒真宗。開皇二十年有敕禁斷不聽傳行。而其徒既眾蔓莚彌廣。同習相黨朋援繁多(即以信行為教主別行異法似同天授立邪三寶)隋文雖斷流行不能杜其根本。我唐天后證聖之元有制令定偽經及雜符錄。遣送祠部集內。前件教門既違背佛意別稱異端。即是偽雜符錄之限。又准天后聖曆二年敕。其有學三階者唯得乞食。長齋絕穀持戒坐禪。此外輒行皆是違法逮
我開元神武皇帝。聖德光被普洽黎元。聖日麗天無幽不燭。知彼反真搆妄出制斷之。開元十三年乙丑歲六月三日
敕諸寺三階院並令除去隔障。使與大院相通眾僧錯居不得別住。所行集錄悉禁斷除毀。若綱維縱其行化誘人。而不糾者勒還俗。幸承明旨使革往非。不敢妄編在於正錄。並從刊削以示將來(其廣略七階但依經集出雖無異義即是信行集錄之數明制除廢不敢輒存故載斯錄)
Among these thirty-five works, however, all of the texts recorded in the Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu may be found, and Chih‑cheng added a note to the effect that the Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu record was not complete. At any rate, Chih‑sheng also recorded alternate titles for almost all of the texts, titles which are confirmed by the entries in the Jen chi lu tu mu. After all 35 works are listed (as composed by Hsin‑hsing of the Chen‑chi ssu), there follows a rather lengthy note, which draws in part on the records of the Li tai san pao chi and the Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu. In addition, the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu records that in 725 separate dwellings for San-chieh followers were banned and the San-chieh literature suppressed.[11] This catalogue also contains an entry for the faked Fo shuo shih so fan che yu ch'ieh fa ching ching, in which the San-chieh monk Shih‑li was involved (see below). After relating the circumstances surrounding the composition of the text (which was based on an earlier text labeled a forgery) Chih‑sheng adds the comment "Deceptions on top of deceptions!”[12]
E. Chen yüan hsin ting shih chiao mu lu
This is one of the more interesting catalogues with regards the San-chieh materials. First, it is possible that the author, Yüan‑chao, was a follower of the San-chieh or held Hsin‑hsing in great esteem, as witnessed by the fact that he composed at least one (and possibly two) memorial steles in Hsin‑hsing's honor (cf. below, Chapter 8). Secondly, there are interesting discrepancies between the various editions of this catalogue with regards the San-chieh literature.[13]
First of all, this catalogue is not included at all in the Sung, Ming, or Ching editions of the Tripitika. In the Koryo (the edition used as the basis of the Taishō Tripitika), however, there is an entry in the chronological catalogue (chüan 10) which states: "Sramana Hsin‑hsing. Thirty-five works in forty-four chüan, Chi‑lu, as explained below in chüans 28 and 30.”[14] The first unusual thing about this entry is that it says that the texts are explained in both the apocryphal (chüan 28) and the canonical catalogue (chüan 30). Secondly, where the texts attributed to all of the other monks whose names are included in this list are then, in order, described more fully in the prose section which follows, there is no further mention of Hsin‑hsing. At the beginning of this section of his catalogue, Yüan‑chao wrote that 99 works by ten people were included in the section.[15] This number encompassed the works of the San-chieh. Because the works of Hsin-hsing are not actually included, however, only 64 works are recorded. Again, when one turns to the 28th chüan (catalogue of apocryphal works) or the 30th chüan (catalogue of the Tripitika) there is no listing of Hsin-hsing's works or any of the San-chieh texts. As with the chronological catalogue (chüan 10), however, it is apparent that the records concerning the San-chieh materials have been removed from the 28th chüan.
First, in recording the content of the apocryphal section of both the K'ai yüan lu and his own Chen yüan lu Yüan-chao noted the thirty-five works in forty-four chüan of Hsin-hsing's works as a single body of texts.[16] In making these entries he also paraphrased Chih-sheng's note[17] to the effect that "Although the Chou lu [Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu] recorded these [texts] it did not include them all." Thus, together with the note in chüan 10, we would expect to find the texts actually listed in the apocryphal section. Further, when we compare the number of texts which are supposed to be included in the 28th chüan, 393,[18] and the number of texts which are actually included, 357, we can see that there are thirty-six texts missing. Now, it is a well‑known fact that the Chen yüan hsin ting shih chiao mu lu follows the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu almost exactly in its entries, and if one compares these two catalogues, it is seen that these missing texts correspond to the Fo ming ching and the thirty-five works of the San-chieh. The Koryo version includes the Fo ming ching in the catalogue of the canon with a note to the effect that it was put there by Imperial order in Chen‑yuan 15, 10th month, 23rd day (799),[19] but there is no further mention of the San-chieh texts. Interesting, though, is the fact that the total number of texts actually listed in this section, 113, is exactly one greater than the figure given at the beginning of the section (T.55.1044b), but the extra text is in the section of Indian texts.
There is another version of the Chen yüan hsin ting shih chiao mu lu, however, which does record all of the San-chieh texts. This is a MS copied in 1115 and kept at Ryūkoku University in Kyoto, Japan.[20] In this MS, in the catalogue of the "Writings of the Sages," there is the following entry: "The catalogue[21] says 'The Collected Records of the Three Stages, thirty-five works in forty-four chüan. Compiled by the Sramana Hsin‑hsing of the Sui dynasty.”[22] There is also a note under the entry for the San chieh fo fa which states that none of these works had been seen in the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu. This is understandable, if we take the "catalogue" in the above statement to refer to the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu, which indeed does not contain the San-chieh materials in the catalogue of the Tripitika. This is then followed by a complete list of the thirty-five works, which is virtually identical to the record in the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu, with the exception that the Ryūkoku MS records the number of pages of each work (the usual custom with text recorded as part of the extant canon, and an indication that Yüan‑chao actually saw the texts).
After the last work recorded, there is a note stating that these texts were ordered into the Tripitika in Chen‑yuan 16, 4th month, 18th day (800). It then states that the "total number or works in the catalogue of Hinayâna works and the Writings of the Sages comes to 475," as opposed to 438 in the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu and 442 in the Koryo version of the Chen yüan hsin ting shih chiao mu lu. The Koryo version has added four texts to the catalogue of the Writings of the Sages which had been newly composed or put into the canon since the writing of the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu, and the Ryūkoku MS added two of these newly compiled works plus the thirty-five works of the San chieh‑chiao, thus the totals all agree.[23] Unfortunately, only fragments of this catalogue remain and so several questions are left unsolved.[24]
If, as Yabuki maintains, the San-chieh materials were removed from the apocryphal section by Yüan‑chao, then they must have been removed after the 28th chüan was completed, in order to explain the difference between the recorded total and the number of works actually included. That is, after recording the San-chieh materials in the 28th chüan, they were ordered into the catalogue of the canon, and thus removed from the 28th chüan, although Yüan‑chao forgot to correct the totals which he had already recorded. This would seem to be born out by the date given for the Imperial order to include the San-chieh materials in the canon (Chen‑yüan 16, 4th month, 13th day), as the catalogue had been begun five months earlier (Chen‑yüan 15, 10th month, 23rd day), and was finished a scant two days later (Chen‑yüan 16, 4th month, 15th day).[25] The problem with this, however, is that the Fo ming ching, the other work taken from the apocryphal section and put in the canon and which, together with the San-chieh works, makes up the texts missing from the apocryphal section, was so ordered in Chen‑yüan 15, 10th month, 23rd day, the day of the order to compile the catalogue. Thus one would expect that Yüan‑chao, compiling the chronological catalogue some time later, would not have included the Fo ming ching in the total count for that section. Since the totals for the 30th chüan (catalogue of the actual canon) are accurate, in both the Ryūkoku MS and the Koryo version, if we follow Yabuki we would have to say that whoever expunged the San-chieh works from the Koryo version changed the totals for the 30th chüan but didn't notice the discrepancy in the 28th chüan (assuming that Yüan‑chao was the source of the discrepancy). The question remains, however, why Yüan‑chao wrote that the San-chieh materials are included in both the 28th and 30th chüans. It seems that each of the editions of this catalogue represent a different stage of literary development, and the further study of the various fragments will no doubt help to clear the matter up. Without examining the chronological catalogue of the Ryūkoku MS we can't tell whether it also says "explained in the 28th and 30th chüans." If so, then we would have to accept that Yüan‑chao put the records in both the apocryphal section and the Writings of the Sages, a strange state of affairs. Then the Koryo edition would represent a point after the San-chieh materials had been removed from the catalogue altogether (perhaps as a emendation by a later scribe, following the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu), but whoever removed them forgot to change the record in the chronological catalogue as well as the totals in 28th chüan. At any rate, that the Ryūkoku MS preserves the state of this catalogue as transmitted in Japan is backed up by two other sources. Dōchū (d. 1281) states in his Tanyōki that he has seen the Chen yüan hsin ting shih chiao mu lu record of thirty-five works in forty-four chüan, and quotes the note from the Ryūkoku MS concerning their inclusion in the catalogue. However, Dōchū also states that he has only been able to actually examine two of the thirty-five works, the San chieh chi lu in four chüan, and the Fa chiai chung sheng gen chi ch'ien shen fa in one chüan (cf. K'ai yüan shi chiao lu nos. 1 and 10‑11). Another record, the Kōzanji Engi, records that of the entire canon as recorded in the Chen yüan hsin ting shih chiao mu lu, the San-chieh materials in forty-four chüan are missing.[26]
See also “The Chen-yüan lu Catalog of Doubtful and Spurious Scriptures,” a paper read at the IABS in Lausanne, 1999.
See the Jen chi lu tu mu in Part 2, Extant Manuscripts.
G. Lun lu nui wu ming ching lun lu
See the Lun lu nui wu ming ching lun lu in Part 2, Extant Manuscripts.
H. Sinp'yon chejong kyojang ch'ongnok
This catalogue, compiled by Ui'chon (1055‑1101), the son of the Korean Emperor Munjong, recorded two works composed by Hsin‑hsing in the 3rd chüan, the catalogue of sastra commentaries and sectarian works:[27]
1. 入道出世要法二卷(或一卷)
2. 三階集錄四卷 已上 信行述
The first is the Ju tao ch'u shih yao fa in two chüan (a note states "or one chüan"), not seen in any of the other catalogues. The second is the San chieh chi lu in four chüan, which most likely corresponds to the San chieh fo fa in four chüan. As this catalogue is made up of titles that Ui'chon had collected from China, Japan, and Korea, we can see that despite the continued persecutions of the San-chieh their main text was still circulating in the 11th century. It also makes one wonder if there might not be some as yet undiscovered San-chieh texts in Korea.
This collection of records from the Shōsō‑in in Nara, Japan, contains entries of San-chieh materials dating from 747. There are four entries: 1) Ming san chieh fo fa, two chüan; 2) Lüeh Ming fo chiai chung sheng gen chi ch'ien shen fa, one chüan; 3) San chieh lu chou (t'ung) pu, nine chüan; 4) San chieh lu, three chuan.[28] The first entry is probably an abridged version of the San chieh fo fa (cf. Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu, no. 3 and K'ai yüan shi chiao lu, no. 3) and the latter entry probably corresponds to the Lüeh ming fa chiai chung sheng gen chi fa recorded in the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu and other catalogues (no. 11) as well as the Fa chiai chung sheng gen chi ch'ien shen fa mentioned by Dōchū in his Tanyōki (cf. above). The last two entries are not recorded in any other catalogues.
This work, composed by Eichō is 1094, is a catalogue of sectarian works and commentaries. There are three works recorded as having been written by Hsin‑hsing: the Shih lun ching i i li ming in three chüan, the Yue tsang fen i i li ming in one chüan, the Shih lun ching lüeh ch'ao in one chüan and the T'ou t'ou ch'i i fa ping ming ch'i i pa men fa:[29]
1. 十輪經依義立名三卷(隋沙門信行撰)
2. 月藏分依義立名一卷(信行十二紙貞元錄). . .
3. 同經略抄一卷(同上) (T 55.1150b)
4. 頭陀乞食法并明乞食八門法各一卷(隋沙門信行撰集入三階集部) (T 55.1155b)
The sutras on which these commentaries are based were both important works for the San-chieh and are often quoted in the extant San-chieh literature. Although the commentaries are no longer extant, these works are recorded in the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu and other catalogues (K'ai yüan shi chiao lu, nos. 28, 29, and 30, respectively).
[1] The Taisho citations are copied from the CBETA Chinese Electronic Tripitika (2001 April); unless otherwise indicated numbers prefacing text entries are added to the original Chinese.
[2] T.49.105b‑c.
[3]According to the Hsü kao seng chüan, although Hsin‑hsing composed these texts before coming to Ch'ang‑an, they were given orally until his disciple, Pei Hsuang‑cheng, recorded them (T.51.559a and T.51.578a).
[4]T.55.277c‑278a. Cf. the Fa yüan chu lin, T.53.1022b-c (ca. 660) which lists the same titles and number of chüan. The Ming pao chi (T.51.788b) also records a thirty-six chüan work, the Jen chi lu, and a four chüan San chieh fo. The title, Jen chi lu probably refers to the San-chieh distinction between the sacred writings of the sages (the sutras) and its own textual tradition, collections of the writings of the sentient beings of the third stage. This title is used by others as well to describe the San-chieh (e.g., the Hua yen wu shih yao wen ta, T.45.532b).
[5]T.55.278a.
[6]T55.474c‑475a.
[7]Cf. the K'ai yüan shi chiao lu, which, after recording the titles of thirty-five of Hsin‑hsing's works, adds "The San chieh fa and the Tsa chi lu [recorded] above (to the right) total thirty-five works in forty-four chüan," indicating that Chih‑sheng considered the Tsa lu to comprise the sum of San-chieh texts other than the San chieh fo fa." T.55.678c.
[8]T.55.679a.
[9]As with the Li tai san pao chi this note tells us that the composition of the Ta chou k'an ting chung ching mu lu continued for some time after the established date of 695.
[10] T.55.678b‑679a.
[11]T.55.679a.
[12]T.55.672b‑c.
[13] See also my overview of the Chen yüan lu, “The Chen-yüan lu Catalog of Doubtful and Spurious Scriptures.”
[14]T.55.845c; cf. chüan 19, T.55.906b.
[15]T.55.845c.
[16]T.55.906b and T.55.909a, respectively.
[17]T.55.679a.
[18]As recorded at the beginning of this section, T.55.1016b.
[19]T.55.1045b.
[20]There are also two copies of the MS in the Ōtani University library.
[21]Possibly a reference to the K'ai yüan lu
[22]Yabuki, appendix, p. 227.
[23]The four texts in the Koryo version are the 1) Hsü K'ai yüan lu; 2) Chen yüan hsin ting shih chiao mu lu; 3) Fo ming ching (T.55.1045b); and 4) Pieh chüan (T.55.1046a). Cf. T.55.853c and T.55.554a.
[24]The Ryūkoku library catalogue lists another fragment of this work but they are unable to locate the text. The Ōtani Wakansho Bunrui Mokuroku (Kyoto: Ōtani University, 1965), vol. 3, pp. 2-3 also lists several MS fragments: chüan 1 (1129 A.D.), chüans 7, 16, and 24 (1130 A.D.), chüan 29 (1115 A.D.); chüan 29 (1099 A.D.); and chüan 30 (1116 A.D.). Unfortunately all of my records regarding these various fragments were lost in transit and I have not had the opportunity to re-check them.
[25]T.55.909b; Bukkyō Daijiten, vol. 6, p. 48.
[26]Dai Nihon Bukkyō Zensho (Tokyo: Dai Nihon Bukkyō Zensho Kankōkai, 1911-1923), vol. 117, p. 259.
[27]T.55.1178b.
[28]For a complete description of the entries in the Shôsô-in Bunsho, see ya Tokujô, "Shôsôin no Kobunsho ni tsuite," op. cit., pp. 71‑72.
[29]T.55.1150b, T.55.1155b. As the title of the last work indicates, this work is listed as two works in the K'ai yüan lu (nos. 25 and 26, T.55.678c).