疑似部

Scope and scholarly tradition

KR6u 疑似部 (Yísì bù) is the Kanripo division of Chinese Buddhist apocrypha — sūtras, śāstras, and ritual texts composed in China but presenting themselves as Indic translations or as canonical Buddha-discourses. In Taishō terms the division reproduces Taishō shinshū daizōkyō vol. 85 nos. 2865–2920 (T85N2865–T85N2920); the matching CANWWW classification (div09) is the unified Taishō section 古逸部全．疑似部 (“Ancient-Lost Section [complete] and Apocrypha Section”), of which KR6u inherits the Yísì (apocrypha) half. The fifty-seven texts now on disk are almost without exception Chinese-composed forgeries (偽 wěi) or doubtful works (疑 yí) preserved because copies entered the Dūnhuáng 敦煌 library cave and were exhumed in the early twentieth century — Pelliot chinois, Stein, Beijing, IDP, and Nakamura collection manuscripts — having never entered the regular Dàzàngjīng 大藏經. The chronological span runs from the early Northern Dynasties (5th–6th century — the Yuèguāng / Dharma-King messianic stratum: KR6u0009, KR6u0010, KR6u0015) through the late Tang and Five Dynasties (the Quànshàn / Xīn púsà “warning sūtra” cluster of c. 793–900: KR6u0052, KR6u0053, KR6u0054, KR6u0057). The corpus is the single most important body of evidence for the popular, sectarian, and indigenously-recast Buddhism of medieval China.

The scholarly tradition for this division is largely a modern creation. Although the cataloguers — Fǎjīng 法經 (《眾經目錄》, 594), Yàncóng 彥琮, Zhīshēng 智昇 (《開元釋教錄》, 730) and their successors — registered most of these scriptures as yí or wěi and excluded them from the official canon, the texts themselves continued to circulate at the level of monastic ritual, Fángshān 房山 stone scripture, lay devotion, and miracle-tale collection. Modern study of the corpus begins with Makita Tairyō 牧田諦亮’s Gikyō kenkyū 疑經研究 (Kyōto: Jinbun Kagaku Kenkyūsho, 1976) — the foundational monograph cited in nearly every per-text note — and continues through Robert E. Buswell, Jr.’s 1990 edited volume Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha (Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press), Kyoko Tokuno’s Apocryphal Texts in Chinese Buddhism (2003) and her 1994 critical study of KR6u0006, Christine Mollier’s Buddhism and Taoism Face to Face (2008), and Cao Ling 曹凌’s Zhōngguó fójiào yíwěijīng zōnglù 中國佛教疑偽經綜錄 (Shànghǎi gǔjí, 2011), the standard contemporary bibliographical compendium in Chinese. A reader of KR6u must keep four overlapping frameworks in mind simultaneously: the Suí–Tang bibliographic-rejection tradition that classified these texts; the medieval Dūnhuáng manuscript culture that preserved them; the East Asian transmission that disseminated some of them (e.g. KR6u0033, the Tiāndì bāyáng shénzhòu jīng, which survives in Chinese, Tibetan, Uyghur, Khotanese, and Mongol versions); and the Taishō editorial decision of the 1920s to gather every recovered non-canonical Dūnhuáng text under T85, which gives the division its peculiar mix of straightforward apocrypha alongside paracanonical items such as Yìjìng’s authentic Wúcháng sānqǐ jīng KR6u0048.

Important texts and text clusters

• The Yuèguāng / Prince Moonlight messianic cluster. The Northern-Dynasties messianic-eschatological apocrypha that fuelled millenarian unrest from the 5th to the 7th century: KR6u0009 Shǒuluó bǐqiū jīng 首羅比丘經 (the central text on the bodhisattva Yuèguāng tóngzǐ 月光童子 as deliverer), KR6u0015 Pǔxián púsà shuō zhèngmíng jīng 普賢菩薩說證明經 (the “Dharma-King will reign thirty years before Maitreya” prophecy), and KR6u0010 Xiǎo fǎmièjìn jīng 小法滅盡經 (the shortened recension of the canonical Fómiè jìn jīng T12n0396, on the corruptions of the saṅgha after the Buddha’s death). Erik Zürcher’s “Prince Moonlight” (T’oung Pao 1982) is the foundational Western-language study of the cluster.
• The Sānjiè-jiào / mòfǎ-rhetoric cluster. KR6u0006 Xiàngfǎ juéyí jīng 像法決疑經 is the principal source of the zhèng-xiàng-mòfǎ triple periodisation and a foundational document of Xìnxíng 信行’s Sānjiè movement; Kyoko Tokuno’s 1994 dissertation is the principal English-language critical study and Jamie Hubbard’s Absolute Delusion, Perfect Buddhahood (2001) the principal modern monograph on the Sānjiè reception.
• The Avalokiteśvara / protective-sūtra cluster. KR6u0034 Gāowáng Guānshìyīn jīng 高王觀世音經 is the single most continuously-transmitted Chinese Buddhist apocryphon, with the Wèi shū-attested origin legend of Sūn Jìngdé 孫敬德’s miraculous deliverance from execution; it is still recited in contemporary Taiwanese and PRC Buddhist circles. The shorter and closely-related KR6u0001 / KR6u0002 Hùshēnmìng jīng 護身命經 (two recensions, from P.2340 and the Nakamura collection) is a Dūnhuáng protective sūtra of the same family.
• The filial-piety and yīnguǒ karmic-ethics cluster. KR6u0023 Fùmǔ ēnzhòng jīng 父母恩重經 is the most influential Chinese Buddhist apocryphon on filial kindness, with its iconographically central “Ten Acts of Parental Kindness” pictorial cycle; Alan Cole’s Mothers and Sons in Chinese Buddhism (1998) is the standard study. KR6u0017 Shàn’è yīnguǒ jīng 善惡因果經 is the principal karmic-catalogue apocryphon and an important source-text for medieval Japanese setsuwa preaching.
• The Buddhist–Daoist crossover apocrypha. KR6u0030 Sānchú jīng 三廚經 is a Buddhist recasting of the Daoist Lǎojūn shuō wǔchú jīng (with falsely-attributed translation to Jñānagupta 闍那崛多 and a brahmin “Dáduōluó”); KR6u0033 Tiāndì bāyáng shénzhòu jīng 天地八陽神呪經 fuses the Buddhist five elements with the Chinese bāguà 八卦 octagonal cosmology and falsely attributes its translation to Yìjìng 義淨. Both are the subject of Christine Mollier’s Buddhism and Taoism Face to Face (2008).
• The early-Chán apocrypha cluster. A doctrinally cohesive group of late-7th to mid-8th-century texts that articulate proto-Chán positions in apocryphal scriptural form: KR6u0019 Fǎwáng jīng 法王經 (the mòfǎ one-vehicle direct-realisation discourse cited by early Chán authors), KR6u0022 Fó wèi xīnwáng púsà shuō tóutuó jīng 佛為心王菩薩說投陀經 (with the rare attached medieval Chán commentary by 惠辨 of Wǔyīn Shānshì Temple 五陰山室寺), KR6u0037 Fǎjù jīng 法句經 (a Chán-affiliated apocryphon piggybacking on the canonical Dharmapada T210), KR6u0038 Fǎjù jīng shū 法句經疏 (the commentary on it, with its Vimalakīrti-silence prologue), and KR6u0021 Fóxìng hǎizàng zhìhuì jiětuō pòxīnxiàng jīng 佛性海藏智慧解脫破心相經. Yanagida Seizan 柳田聖山 and Wendi Adamek treat these as foundational documents of pre-Northern-Chán self-articulation.
• The Lotus pseudo-chapter cluster. Two anonymous Chinese-composed pseudo-chapters of the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra: KR6u0008 “Chapter 29” Dùliàng tiāndì pǐn 度量天地品 (a cosmographic appendix) and KR6u0035 “Chapter 30” Mǎmíng púsà pǐn 馬鳴菩薩品. Kumārajīva’s standard Lotus has only twenty-seven chapters; the chapter-numbering is a deliberate apocryphal posture.
• The chànhuǐ / repentance apocrypha. KR6u0007 Dàtōng fāngguǎng chànhuǐ mièzuì zhuāngyán chéngfó jīng 大通方廣懺悔滅罪莊嚴成佛經 is a three-fascicle ritual-repentance apocryphon and one of the longest single texts in the division; its Fángshān stone-scripture witness shows that despite cataloguer rejection it had high real-cultic prestige in the early Tang. Kuo Li-ying’s Confession et contrition (EFEO 1994) is the principal monograph.
• The late-Tang “warning sūtra” (jǐngshì jīng 警世經) cluster. A tightly linked group of late-8th to 9th-century apocrypha that frame an imperial edict, catalogue fatal-disease prophecies, and prescribe the merit-copying formula: KR6u0052 Quànshàn jīng 勸善經, KR6u0053 / KR6u0054 Xīn púsà jīng 新菩薩經 (T2917A / T2917B). The cluster is uniquely datable because of its citation of the late-Tang chancellor Jiǎ Dān 賈耽 (730–805); Makita reads the prophecy as a response to the Zhēnyuán-19 (803) epidemic and famine.
• The Sēngqié-cult apocryphon. KR6u0057 Sēngqié héshàng yù rù nièpán shuō liù dù jīng 僧伽和尚欲入涅槃說六度經 is a 9th–10th-century Dūnhuáng apocryphon framed as the parinirvāṇa discourse of the Sogdian-origin monk Sēngqié of Sìzhōu 僧伽 (628–710), the Sìzhōu Dàshèng 泗州大聖; the text is a principal witness for the late-Tang doctrine that Sēngqié is a huàshēn 化身 of Avalokiteśvara who ferries devotees across the cataclysm of the kalpa in a “transformation citadel” 化城.
• Yìjìng’s authentic Wúcháng sānqǐ jīng. KR6u0048 Wúcháng sānqǐ jīng 無常三啟經 is the principal paracanonical outlier of the division: not a Chinese apocryphon at all but the great Tang pilgrim Yìjìng’s 義淨 compilation (post-695) of an Anityatā-sūtra recitation drawn from the Āgama tradition, prescribed in his Nánhǎi jì guī nèifǎ zhuàn. It is in T85 only because its sole surviving witness is a Dūnhuáng manuscript.

Important persons

The overwhelming majority of texts in KR6u are anonymous Chinese compositions. The names attached to them either belong to apocryphal posture (false-attribution to a famous Indic translator), or to the doctrinal-narrative frame of the apocryphon itself (the “speaker” of the discourse), or — in a small minority — to genuine authors of paracanonical compilations. The persons worth noting in this division specifically are:

• 義淨 — Yìjìng (635–713), Tang pilgrim and translator. The actual compiler of KR6u0048 Wúcháng sānqǐ jīng, but also the falsely-attributed translator named in the colophon of KR6u0033 Tiāndì bāyáng shénzhòu jīng — a juxtaposition that illustrates the apocryphal practice of borrowing a celebrated translator’s prestige.
• 闍那崛多 — Jñānagupta (523–600/605), Northern Zhōu / Suí translator. Falsely-attributed co-translator of KR6u0030 Sānchú jīng; the apocryphon is not part of his authentic corpus.
• 惠辨 — Huìbiàn, chánshī of Wǔyīn Shānshì Temple 五陰山室寺. Author of the inline commentary to KR6u0022 Tóutuó jīng; otherwise unattested in the standard Gāosēng zhuàn literature. The colophon is the only evidence for his existence and place of activity.
• 賈耽 — Jiǎ Dān (730–805), late-Tang Left Chancellor (zuǒ chéngxiàng 左丞相) and geographer. The pseudo-edict frame of KR6u0052 Quànshàn jīng and the paired KR6u0053 / KR6u0054 Xīn púsà jīng invokes his name; his entry into the chancellery in 793 and death in 805 supplies the firmest terminus a quo in the entire division.
• 僧伽 — Sēngqié (628–710), the Sogdian-origin Sìzhōu monk, posthumously the Sìzhōu Dàshèng 泗州大聖 / Great Sage of Sìzhōu. The framing narrator of KR6u0057, identified from the late Tang onwards as a manifestation of Avalokiteśvara.
• 法藏 — Făzàng (643–712), Tang Huayan patriarch. Cited in one of the per-text notes (KR6u0021) as a near-contemporary doctrinal reference; not an author in this division.

Topics

• The cataloguer’s categories 疑 / 偽 / 偽妄. From Fǎjīng’s 法經 《眾經目錄》 (594) onwards, scriptural cataloguers maintained a tripartite typology — zhèng 正 (authentic translations), yí 疑 (doubtful), wěi 偽 (forged) — and assigned almost every text now in KR6u to the latter two categories. Zhīshēng’s 智昇 《開元釋教錄》 (730) is the principal Tang regulariser of this taxonomy; Kyoko Tokuno’s chapter in Buswell 1990 is the standard English-language survey. The cataloguers’ rejection is the constitutive negative act that defines the division — without it, many of these texts would simply have entered the canon.
• Eschatology and mòfǎ rhetoric. The doctrine that the post-Buddha world undergoes successive stages of decline — true / semblance / final dharma (zhèngfǎ / xiàngfǎ / mòfǎ) — receives its principal Chinese articulation in this division, especially in KR6u0006, KR6u0010, and KR6u0019. Jan Nattier’s Once Upon a Future Time (1991) is the foundational study of the fǎmiè prophecy genre.
• Messianism: Yuèguāng, Maitreya, Sēngqié-as-Avalokiteśvara. The expectation of an imminent saviour — Prince Moonlight (Yuèguāng tóngzǐ) in KR6u0009 / KR6u0015, a “Dharma-King” preceding Maitreya, and the Sēngqié-as-Avalokiteśvara in KR6u0057 — is the principal indigenous Chinese soteriological motif of the division. These texts are the scriptural backbone for medieval Chinese millennial movements; Zürcher 1982 and Hubert Seiwert’s Popular Religious Movements and Heterodox Sects in Chinese History (2003) are the principal modern studies.
• Buddhist–Daoist textual borrowing. KR6u0030 Sānchú jīng (a Buddhist re-frame of the Daoist Wǔchú jīng) and KR6u0033 Tiāndì bāyáng shénzhòu jīng (incorporating the bāguà cosmology) are the canonical examples in modern scholarship of Buddhist–Daoist mutual borrowing in medieval China. Christine Mollier’s Buddhism and Taoism Face to Face (2008) is the principal monograph.
• The sinification of Buddhist ethics. Filial piety (KR6u0023 Fùmǔ ēnzhòng jīng), karmic retribution (KR6u0017 Shàn’è yīnguǒ jīng), and lay-precept moralism (KR6u0057’s six categories of practice) reformulate Buddhist soteriology in terms responsive to Confucian xiào 孝 and indigenous Chinese ethics. Alan Cole’s Mothers and Sons in Chinese Buddhism (1998), Kenneth Ch’en’s “Filial Piety in Chinese Buddhism” (1968), and Stephen Teiser’s The Scripture on the Ten Kings (1994) are the principal English-language treatments.
• Apocalypse, protection, and the cult of the recited word. A large sub-class of these texts — KR6u0001, KR6u0002, KR6u0014 Jiùjí jīng, KR6u0034 Gāowáng Guānshìyīn jīng, KR6u0040 Qī qiān fó shénfú jīng, KR6u0033 Tiāndì bāyáng shénzhòu jīng — promise protection from imprisonment, disease, banditry, fire, water, and judicial calamity for those who recite, copy, or carry the scripture on the person. The “merit-copying formula” (recite/copy n times → deliverance for self / household / six relations) is the unifying genre marker.
• The early-Chán apocrypha as proto-Chán self-articulation. The cluster KR6u0019, KR6u0022, KR6u0037 / KR6u0038, KR6u0021 articulates a doctrine of direct realisation, mind-as-sovereign (xīnwáng), and mind-fusion (róngxīn 融心) before the rise of polished Northern-Chán prose. Yanagida Seizan and Wendi Adamek treat these as the formative substratum of Chinese Chán self-understanding outside the polished lineage texts.
• The apocryphal Lotus. KR6u0008 “Chapter 29” and KR6u0035 “Chapter 30” present themselves as supplementary chapters of a Lotus Sūtra with 27 + n chapters; no such expanded Lotus is attested as a continuous text. This is the most striking single instance of canonical-text imitation in the division.
• Dūnhuáng as the principal manuscript repository. Almost every text in KR6u is preserved only in Dūnhuáng manuscripts (P., S., Beijing, Nakamura, IDP). The Sānjiè 三界 Temple monk Dàozhēn 道真 (Five Dynasties) is the named copyist of several. The closure of the library cave in the early 11th century is the terminus ante quem for the entire corpus.
• The Taishō editorial principle. The 1920s Taishō editors gathered every non-canonical recovered Dūnhuáng text under T85, regardless of whether it is forged or merely paracanonical. The result is the mixed character of KR6u: predominantly Chinese-composed apocrypha, with one or two genuine paracanonical outliers (KR6u0048). Cross-cultural diffusion: the Old Tibetan, Uyghur, Khotanese, and Mongol versions of KR6u0033 make a single Chinese apocryphon into perhaps the most cross-culturally diffused Buddhist text of medieval Inner Asia.

Timeline

The dating brackets below follow the notBefore / notAfter frontmatter values in each per-text note. Brackets are written explicitly when wide. Northern Dynasties is sometimes given as a 50-year window; mid-Tang and late-Tang brackets are tighter where chancellor-attribution or terminus a quo arguments allow.

• c. 420 (date evidence cited from Strickmann, Chinese Magical Medicine, 2002) — Xiǎo fǎmièjìn jīng 小法滅盡經 KR6u0010 — earliest plausible composition window of the fǎmiè short recension.
• 5th–7th c. (400–700) — Hùshēnmìng jīng (P.2340 recension) 護身命經 KR6u0001; parallel recension KR6u0002 — Northern Dynasties / Suí–early-Tang protective sūtras.
• 5th–7th c. (400–700) — Círén wèn bāshí zhǒng hǎo jīng 慈仁問八十種好經 KR6u0003; Jué zuìfú jīng 決罪福經 KR6u0004 — Northern Dynasties karmic-ethics apocrypha.
• 5th–7th c. (500–700) — Miàohǎo bǎochē jīng 妙好寶車經 KR6u0005.
• 6th c. (550–600) — Xiàngfǎ juéyí jīng 像法決疑經 KR6u0006 — terminus ante quem Fǎjīng 594; foundational text of xiàngfǎ-decline rhetoric and the Sānjiè movement.
• c. 566 (date evidence cited from Daoxuan, Guang hongming ji) — Dàtōng fāngguǎng chànhuǐ mièzuì zhuāngyán chéngfó jīng 大通方廣懺悔滅罪莊嚴成佛經 KR6u0007 — long chànhuǐ ritual apocryphon, Fángshān-engraved.
• 6th–7th c. (500–700) — Miàofǎ liánhuá jīng dùliàng tiāndì pǐn dì èrshíjiǔ 妙法蓮華經度量天地品第二十九 KR6u0008 — Lotus pseudo-chapter 29.
• mid-6th c. (530–580) — Shǒuluó bǐqiū jīng 首羅比丘經 KR6u0009 — central Yuèguāng messianic apocryphon, Northern Dynasties.
• mid-6th c. (530–580) — Pǔxián púsà shuō zhèngmíng jīng 普賢菩薩說證明經 KR6u0015 — “Dharma-King will reign thirty years before Maitreya”.
• mid-6th c. (530–580) — Gāowáng Guānshìyīn jīng 高王觀世音經 KR6u0034 — the Wèi shū-attested Sūn Jìngdé deliverance scripture; still recited today.
• 6th–8th c. (500–800) — Tiāngōng jīng 天公經 KR6u0012; Rúlái zài jīnguān zhǔlěi qīngjìng zhuāngyán jìngfú jīng 如來在金棺囑累清淨莊嚴敬福經 KR6u0013; Jiùjí jīng 救疾經 KR6u0014 — Suí–Tang protective and ritual apocrypha.
• 6th–7th c. (500–700) — Dàfāngguǎng huáyán shí’è pǐn jīng 大方廣華嚴十惡品經 KR6u0011; Shàn’è yīnguǒ jīng 善惡因果經 KR6u0017 — Suí–Tang karmic catechisms.
• 6th–8th c. (500–700) — Zhòumèi jīng 呪魅經 KR6u0018; Fóxìng hǎizàng zhìhuì jiětuō pòxīnxiàng jīng 佛性海藏智慧解脫破心相經 KR6u0021 — Suí–Tang exorcistic and proto-Chán apocrypha.
• 6th–8th c. (500–800) — Dàwēiyí qǐngwèn 大威儀請問 KR6u0020; Yánshòumìng jīng 延壽命經 KR6u0024; Shānhǎihuì púsà jīng 山海慧菩薩經 KR6u0027; Xiànbào dāngshòu jīng 現報當受經 KR6u0028 — Suí–Tang ritual and karmic apocrypha.
• 6th–8th c. (500–700) — Miàofǎ liánhuá jīng Mǎmíng púsà pǐn dì sānshí 妙法蓮華經馬明菩薩品第三十 KR6u0035 — Lotus pseudo-chapter 30.
• 6th–8th c. (500–800) — Wúliàng dàcí jiào jīng 無量大慈教經 KR6u0039; Qī qiān fó shénfú jīng 七千佛神符經 KR6u0040; Xiànzài shífāng qiān wǔbǎi fó míng 現在十方千五百佛名 KR6u0041; Zhāifǎ qīngjìng jīng 齋法清淨經 KR6u0036; Qī nǚ guān jīng 七女觀經 KR6u0049 — Suí–Tang Buddha-name and ritual-purification apocrypha.
• 7th c. (600–800) — Jiūjìng dàbēi jīng 究竟大悲經 (fascicles 2–4) KR6u0016; Fó wèi xīnwáng púsà shuō tóutuó jīng juǎn shàng 佛為心王菩薩說投陀經卷上 KR6u0022 (with 惠辨’s Chán-affiliated commentary); Fùmǔ ēnzhòng jīng 父母恩重經 KR6u0023; Rúlái chéngdào jīng 如來成道經 KR6u0026; Dàbiàn xiézhèng jīng 大辯邪正經 KR6u0029; Guān jīng 觀經 KR6u0050 — Tang Chán-affiliated, filial-piety, and orthodoxy-distinguishing apocrypha.
• 7th–8th c. (600–750) — Fǎwáng jīng 法王經 KR6u0019 — early-Chán mòfǎ discourse, the 1500-years-after-parinirvāṇa setting.
• 7th–8th c. (600–750) — Sānchú jīng 三廚經 KR6u0030 — Buddhist recasting of the Daoist Wǔchú jīng; falsely attributed to 闍那崛多 Jñānagupta.
• 7th–8th c. (600–800) — Yàoxíng shěshēn jīng 要行捨身經 KR6u0031; Fómǔ jīng 佛母經 KR6u0056 — Tang ascetic and devotional apocrypha.
• 7th–8th c. (600–750) — Fǎjù jīng 法句經 KR6u0037 (Chán-affiliated, distinct from canonical Dharmapada T210); paired commentary KR6u0038 Fǎjù jīng shū 法句經疏 (c. 600–800).
• c. 690–720 — Shì suǒ fàn zhě yújiā fǎjìng jīng 示所犯者瑜伽法鏡經 KR6u0032 — late-7th to early-8th-century apocryphon.
• 695–713 — Wúcháng sānqǐ jīng 無常三啟經 KR6u0048 — Yìjìng’s 義淨 authentic Anityatā compilation, post-return from India.
• c. 700–760 — Tiāndì bāyáng shénzhòu jīng 天地八陽神呪經 KR6u0033 — bāguà-cosmography apocryphon, falsely attributed to 義淨 Yìjìng; subsequently translated into Tibetan, Uyghur, Khotanese, and Mongol.
• 704 — colophon date of KR6u0054 Xīn púsà jīng 新菩薩經 (T2917B); the warning-sūtra recension lineage was repeatedly re-anchored to different reign-titles.
• 8th–10th c. (700–900) — Xùmìng jīng 續命經 KR6u0025; Pǔxián púsà xíngyuàn wáng jīng 普賢菩薩行願王經 KR6u0043; Dàfāngguǎng fó huáyán jīng Pǔxián púsà xíngyuàn wáng pǐn 大方廣佛華嚴經普賢菩薩行願王品 KR6u0044; Dìzàng púsà jīng 地藏菩薩經 KR6u0045; Jīnyǒu tuóluóní jīng 金有陀羅尼經 KR6u0046; Zàn sēng gōngdé jīng 讚僧功德經 KR6u0047; Jiù zhū zhòngshēng yīqiè kǔnàn jīng 救諸眾生一切苦難經 KR6u0051 — mid- to late-Tang Buddha-name, Samantabhadra, and Kṣitigarbha apocrypha.
• 7th–9th c. (600–900) — Sānwàn fó tóng gēnběn shénmì zhī yìn 三萬佛同根本神祕之印 KR6u0042 — late-Tang dhāraṇī apocryphon.
• 7th–9th c. (500–900) — Shìjiā guānhuà huányú jīng 釋家觀化還愚經 KR6u0055 — late-Tang Dūnhuáng apocryphon.
• 8th–10th c. (710–1000) — Sēngqié héshàng yù rù nièpán shuō liù dù jīng 僧伽和尚欲入涅槃說六度經 KR6u0057 — terminus a quo 710, the death of 僧伽 Sēngqié; the principal Sìzhōu Dàshèng cult apocryphon.
• 793–900 — Quànshàn jīng 勸善經 KR6u0052; Xīn púsà jīng 新菩薩經 (T2917A) KR6u0053 — terminus a quo the entry of chancellor 賈耽 Jiǎ Dān into the central chancellery in 793; Makita reads the prophecy as referring to the Zhēnyuán-19 (803) epidemic.