Shàngshēng jīng shū suí xīn chāo kēwén 上生經疏隨新抄科文
Topical Outline Following the New Digest Commentary on the Ascent Sūtra Author unknown
About the work
The Shàngshēng jīng shū suí xīn chāo kēwén 上生經疏隨新抄科文 is a one-fascicle structural outline (kēwén 科文) accompanying 詮明 Quánmíng’s Shàngshēng jīng huì gǔ tōng jīn xīn chāo (KR6i0045, S06n0046). The kē (topical outline) is a separate document providing a hierarchical map of the larger commentary’s argument, enabling readers to navigate the exegesis. This text is preserved in the Sòngzàng yízhēn 宋藏遺珍 collection alongside its parent commentary.
Prefaces
The text opens with a heavily damaged passage: 【上闕】 (“upper [text] lost”), indicating that the beginning of the fascicle is missing in transmission. The extant text begins mid-outline with a section on the exegesis of “Ānán-yaśas” (我聞 wǒ wén, “Thus I have heard”), structured into a hierarchical tree of commentary subdivisions. The outline proceeds through extremely detailed subdivisions, citing Yogācāra philosophical positions on the nature of hearing (identifying distinctions between 龍軍, Nāgasena, and 親光, Bandhuprabhā, on whether the Buddha “speaks dharma”). The heavy use of Yogācāra scholastic categories — 唯識 (Vijñaptimātra), distinctions of 道理時 (conventional time) vs. 唯識時 (vijñāna-only time) — confirms the Yogācāra affiliation of the parent commentary.
Abstract
The kēwén is the structural companion to KR6i0045, which itself survives only in fascicles 2 and 4. It similarly begins with a lacuna marker (【上闕】), suggesting that the top of the outline — covering the opening of the commentary — was already lost when the text was copied into the Sòngzàng yízhēn. The surviving outline covers the exegesis of the formula “如是我聞” (“Thus I have heard”), with detailed sub-branching typical of Táng Yogācāra commentary practice. The pattern of interdigitated lacunae (【闕】 markers appearing mid-tree at several points) indicates the source manuscript suffered extensive damage before the Sòngzàng yízhēn copy was made. No author is identified in the surviving text; the outline presumably was produced either by 詮明 himself as a structural key to his own commentary, or by a student in his circle. Since the parent commentary (KR6i0045) is attributed to him, this outline is conventionally treated as part of the same textual unit.
Translations and research
No substantial secondary literature located.