Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 5Indian and Buddhist StudiesBiblical Studies and InterpretationClassical Studies and Philology

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparison of the Pali and Chinese Versions of the Vangisa-thera Samyutta, a Collection of Early Buddhist Discourses on the Venerable Vangisa

Mun-Keat, Choong,·2007·Buddhist Studies Review

Abstract

This article first briefly examines the textual structure of the Vangisathera Samyutta of the Pali Samyutta-nikaya in conjunction with two other versions preserved in Chinese translation in Taisho vol. 2, nos. 99 and 100. Then it compares the main teachings contained in the three versions. These three versions of this collection on the subject of the venerable Vangisa represent three different early Buddhist schools within the Sthavira branch. This comparative study of these three different versions focuses on three major topics: (i) Arhants at the pravarana ceremony; (ii) sensual desire and the way to extinguish it; and (iii) the Buddha’s teachings to Vangisa. It reveals similarities and significant differences in structure and doctrinal content, thus advancing the historical/critical study of early Buddhist doctrine in this area.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1558/bsrv.v24i1.35

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Mun-Keat, C.
Venue
Buddhist Studies Review
Published
2007-05-01
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
35-45
ISSN
  • 0265-2897 (ISSN-L)
  • 1747-9681
OpenAlex
W1789422873
Cited by
5
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Buddhist Studies Review (publishedVersion)
  • RUNE (Research UNE) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Indian and Buddhist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Classical Studies and Philology
Keywords
Chinese translation of Buddhist texts, Taisho Tripitaka, textual comparison

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.