Cited by 11Indian and Buddhist StudiesStudy and Philosophy of ReligionBiblical Studies and Interpretation

On the Vibhajjavadins: The Mahimsasaka, Dhammaguttaka, Kassapiya and Tambapanniya branches of the ancient Theriyas

Cousins, L. S.·2001·Buddhist Studies Review

Abstract

.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1558/bsrv.v18i2.14449

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Early Theravādins accepted Mahāyāna teachings, and it was not until the tenth century that a reform movement led the lineage to become fixedly anti-Mahāyāna.

    “It seems that early Therav adins accepted Mah ay ana teachings and that it was not until the tenth century that a reform movement led the lineage to become fixedly anti-Mah ay ana (Cousins 2001; Walters 1997).”

    From Early Indian Mahāyāna Buddhism II: New Perspectives (2010) · cites this paper as Cousins 2001

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cousins, L. S.
Corresponding author
Cousins, L. S.
Venue
Buddhist Studies Review
Published
2001-05-21
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
131-182
ISSN
  • 0265-2897 (ISSN-L)
  • 1747-9681
OpenAlex
W3160954567
Cited by
11
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Buddhist Studies Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Indian and Buddhist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
Keywords
Abhidhamma Pitaka, Theravada Buddhism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review