The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 119 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary [T1775] by Sengzhao et alii and the Chinese Conquest of Buddhism
Open accessAbstract
The arising of a new awareness: from geyi 格義 to textual study By the time he moved to Chang'an Dao'an was already deeply aware of the pitfalls and shortcomings of the earlier exegetical techniques aiming at making sense of the often obscure and even abstruse Buddhist texts in Chinese translation such as the "matching concepts" (geyi 格 義).This expedient consisted in "correlating the enumerations of items (shishu 事數) 98 in the sūtras with [comparable lists of notions found in] non-Buddhist writings for the purpose of generating understanding" 99 .Dao'an had learned this approach from Zhu Faya 竺法雅 (1 st half 4 th cent.) 100 between 335 and 348 101 while residing in Ye 鄴 (near Linzhang 臨漳, in Southern 95 昔晉氏平吳，利在二陸。今破漢南，獲士裁一人有半耳 (Xi Zuochi's biography 習鑿齒傳, in Jin Shu 晉書 vol.82).This fact is differently reported in Dao'an's biography in Gaoseng zhuan [T2059]: "[Dao]an and [the Jin commander and governor of the Jin 晉 fortress of Xiang Yang 襄陽] Zhu Xu were both captured by [Fu] Jian.[Fu] Jian said to the vice director of the Department of State Affairs Quan Yi: 'I took [the city of] Xiangyang employing a hundred thousand divisions and I only obtained a man and a half.[Quan] Yi asked: 'Whom?' Jian replied 'The one man is Dao'an, while Xi Zuochi is the half man'" 「安與朱序俱獲於堅。堅謂僕射權翼曰："朕以十萬之師取 襄陽，唯得一人半。"翼曰："誰耶？"堅曰："安公一人，習鑿齒半人也。"」(vol.5, p. 352, c25-28) 96 The best account of Dao'an and his equipe's translation activity in Chang'an is found in Palumbo's study on the translation of the Ekottarikāgama 增一阿含經 and its commentary, the Fenbie gongde lun 分別功德論 (Palumbo, 2013).See also Ren Jiyu 1985, p. 181 and Tang Yongtong 2000, vol. 1, p. 167.For a historical study on Fu Jian and his rule see Rogers 1968.97 This new phase is described by Zürcher as follows: "[...] a new chapter in the history of Northern Buddhism [...] characterized by a renewed influx of missionaries, scriptures and ideas from Central Asia and India, huge translation projects, state patronage and supervision, and the emergence of a body of scriptural and scholastic literature (Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna) together with a new method of exegesis and a new translation technique" (Zürcher 2007, p. 114) 98 The term shishu 事數 is used in Shishuo xinyu , Wenxue 59 (cf.Yu Jiaxi 1993, p. 210) and clearly explained in
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from a shortened version of the paper’s full text (it is longer than we read).
TL;DR
This dissertation analyzes the collective *Vimalakīrtinirdeśa* commentary T1775, traditionally ascribed to Sengzhao but containing annotations by Kumārajīva, Sengzhao, Daosheng, and Daorong, as a case study in the Chinese appropriation of Buddhism. It argues that the commentary’s translation and exegetical practices show Chinese exegetes actively reshaping Indian Buddhist materials rather than passively receiving them.
Key findings
- T1775 is a multilayered interlinear commentary on Kumārajīva’s 406 translation; Kumārajīva’s portion likely records oral exegesis from the translation assembly, with 28 references to the Sanskrit text and ten preserved audience questions.
- Kumārajīva’s exegesis combines transliteration and explanation to mediate between domesticating and foreignizing translation, explains Sanskrit terms and etymologies, uses numerical categories and Indian social/cultural lore, and sometimes criticizes renderings later adopted differently by Xuanzang.
- Sengzhao’s annotations include original philosophical passages in parallel prose, paraphrases of Kumārajīva, and independent explanations drawing on Xuanxue and texts such as Laozi, Zhuangzi, and Yijing, including the “Perfect Man” figure; Daosheng’s commentary uses Xuanxue language theory to look through words toward truth and anticipates Buddha-nature and *li* ideas.
- The collective commentary’s textual history suggests materials circulated separately, were likely assembled under the Southern Liang (502–557), possibly by Emperor Wu; Daoye’s mid-Tang *Guanzhong shu* (completed 760, revised 765) revived it; Northern Song scholars revised and collated the 10-fascicle T1775 for printing.
Methods
- Historical-philological and hermeneutical study of T1775, its prefaces, Dunhuang/Turfan manuscripts, catalogues, travel diaries, and related versions (T474, T475, T476) and later commentaries.
- Close reading and comparative analysis of translation choices, exegetical formats, doctrinal content, and editorial/transmission evidence, contextualized within the authors’ biographies and Chinese intellectual background.
Limitations
- The author states he did not systematically compare T1775 with later Chinese commentaries, did not deeply investigate Indian Buddhist exegetical or preaching influences because Indian sources are scarce, and deferred a dedicated linguistic appendix to future work.
- Evident from the text: the study is deliberately sinological and focuses on the Chinese cultural milieu, so Indian context is secondary; some transmission claims rest on sources the text itself flags as uncertain, such as Fei Zhangfang’s catalogue and Chikō’s source.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
89 Sources not found · 85 Own interpretation · 50 No basis given · 38 Not checked yet · 26 Own result · 4 No full text of the sources
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“they created a gap which was bridged over by a thorough oral explanation.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a whole, Kumārajīva's exegesis constitutes a captivating blend of Indian patterns of oral exposition, Central Asian storytelling and Chinese philological exercise.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“My analysis shows that at the basis of Kumārajīva's exegesis is the effort to introduce the Chinese audience to the broader Indian cultural context in which Buddhism as a religion and a way of life had arisen and developed.”
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The most striking feature of his commentary is perhaps the adoption of the Xuanxue language theory claiming that the words of a text could not exhaustively convey the message the Sages of old had in mind”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Related to this kind of explanations are the references made to the Sanskrit text (28 occurrences) for better specifying the meaning of certain words.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During the Sui a new kind of exegesis was started by state-sponsored exegetes like the above mentioned Zhiyi and Jizang.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is proved inter alia by the fact that some entries of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary relate the assessments of the issuer (viz.Kumārajīva) on the rendering of certain terms and expressions found in the text.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The court supervision on Dao'an's translation activity is evident from the sources.”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in fact, such comparative analysis shows that, whether the former were considered as a set of injunctions, they would not have been always applied in a consistent way.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evidently, most of these annotations were inserted in the translated text through small interlinear characters during the revision process.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 139
- It may state two separate claims as one. 150
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The annotations, which follow the text in the form of an inter-linear commentary (viz.they are”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“To these three authors a fourth one must be added, i.e.Daorong 道融 (355 -434), another of Kumārajīva's assistants who is credited with having composed a complete commentary on this scripture (Weimo yishu 維摩義疏) 2 ; however, since only one entry has been preserved in the collective commentary 3”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zhu Weimojie jing 注維摩詰經 [T1775], vol.5, p. 371, c28-p.372, a12
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“included in Taishō Tripiṭaka vol.38, n. 1775”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Taishō Tripiṭaka vol.38, n. 1775
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“a manuscript dating around 1150 was discovered in the library of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on the 30 th of July 1999 by a Japanese é quipe directed by Prof. Hisao Takahashi; the text has been published by the Taishō University in 2004”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Taishō University in 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Kumārajīva's exegesis is constructed upon a number of “building blocks” which I analyze in this work.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa survives also in Tibetan (it was translated in this language twice, the definitive version being completed in the ninth century by the well-known translator Chos Nid Tshul Khrims, [skrt.Dharmataśila]) and Sanskrit”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Taishō University in 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“no less than three Chinese versions of it have survived: besides Kumārajīva's one we also possess Zhi Qian's 支謙 (fl.222 -252 AD) one produced during the Three Kingdoms Period (likely between 222 and 229) and Xuanzang's 玄奘 (602 -664) one dating 650 AD along with a large number of commentaries 16”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wang Xinshui 2006, pp. 5 -7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The first is constituted by the explanation of Sanskrit words, often enriched by etymologies and examples”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Daosheng developed this assumption into an effective heuristic method which allowed him to find out the truth beyond words; this approach represented an original “middle way” between the two extremes of “holding stubbornly to the surface text” and “discarding the text tout court for accessing the truth only by relying on the intuition of the heart/mind”.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The annotations, which follow the text in the form of an inter-linear commentary (viz.they are”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As we know from the sources, Sui exegetes like Zhiyi 智顗 (538 -597) and Jizang 吉藏 (549 -623) consulted this early compilation which was edited during the Southern dynasties, most likely under the Southern Liang 南梁 (502 -557).”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On imperial request, Zhiyi had composed a series of new commentaries on the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa which were later adopted as the official interpretation of the text; as a consequence, the old Guanzhong exegesis became obsolete and felt into oblivion.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After their composition, exegetical materials related to this scripture must have circulated in the form of independent commentaries for some time before four of them were assembled into a collective commentary.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it contains in nuce some important conceptions (e.g. the Buddha-nature theory, the characterization of Buddha as the Principle -li 理 -, or cosmic truth pervading the universe) which Daosheng would further develop in later works such as the Lotus sūtra Commentary and the Nirvāṇa sūtra Commentary.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It was under the Northern Song that the commentary in 10 fascicles underwent what was probably the last complete revision and collation before being printed and included in the Buddhist Canon.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The commentary I deal with is consistent in size and content and the annotations it contains belong to three distinct commentators which are among the most important and influential Buddhist personalities of their time; even though their paths converged in Chang'an at the beginning of the 5 th century, their intellectual development and world-view are very different.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Curiously, during the translation of the Sarvāstivāda bhikṣu prātimokṣa 比丘大戒 in 382 a similar argument referring to Chinese traditional scholarship was upheld by the monk Huichang 慧常 (who was acting as scribe) to oppose Dao'an's proposition of making some exceptions to the rules and remove the redundant parts of the text.”
- Also stated in: § 2.4 Translation approach and the Classical scholarship · plain
“The fact that Dao'an accepted Huichang's criticism and eventually desisted from his initial intention”
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 2.4 Translation approach and the Classical scholarship · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If we examine the text in question, indeed we find the transcript of many explanations provided by Kumārabuddhi; even though they are but short glosses, they contain in nuce many of the elements which will become central in Kumārajīva's oral exegesis”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“From this passage we know that the translation of this scripture took place under the auspices of the royal family: it was the king Yao Xing 姚興 in person who invited Kumārajīva to undertake the translation because not satisfied with the previous versions, and two of the ruler's younger brothers and high rank state-officials Yao Xian 姚顯 and Yao Song 姚嵩 also attended the translation together with a”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites T38, no.1775, p. 327, b5-12
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Shi Zhao xu 釋肇序 T2776
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As we know from the sources, during those lectures a debate was held on the text in order to clarify its meaning and make its Chinese rendering as correct as possible.This debate was not restricted to a small number of specialized operators, but was open to the whole assembly whose members could intervene raising doubts and posing questions.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By the end of the year 401 the Kuchean master Kumārajīva entered Chang'an and was put in charge by the ruler of the Later Qin 後秦 Yao Xing 姚興 of a huge translation enterprise”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During Kumārajīva's era, for the first time the sources report the numbers of monks and laymen attending the translation activity, those being usually counted by the thousands.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The high court official Zhao Zheng 趙整 158 , who served the king Fu Jian 苻堅 as prefect (taishou 太守) and secretary (mishu lang 秘書郎) took active part in organizing the translations work, giving instructions to the bilingual interpreters and revising the final versions.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unfortunately, his wish to discuss obscure passages of the scripture and doctrinal issues with the Kuchean master was to remain unfulfilled, as it was only sixteen years after Dao'an's death that Kumārajīva entered Chang'an”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After the collapse of Fu Jian's regime, the power was taken by Yao Chang 姚萇, who ruled from 384 to 394.Little is known about his attitude toward Buddhism; however, as part of a consolidated tradition in the city, Buddhist activities like translation were probably at least tolerated.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As it has been said above, he was the most important interpreter in Dao'an's translation enterprise.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In investigating this text we can profit from the fact of being particularly well informed about its genesis, the circumstances and the process of its composition.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“「什以高世之量 215 ，冥心真境。既盡環中，又善方言。時手執胡文，口自宣譯，道俗 虔虔，一言三復。陶冶精求，務存聖意。其文約而詣，其旨婉而彰。微遠之言於茲顯 然。」《出三藏記集》卷 8 (CBETA, T55, no.2145, p. 58, b14-17)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites T55, no.2145, p. 58, b14-17
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In this regard it must be noted that the Kuchean translator borrowed heavily from Zhi Qian 支謙's Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 218 , albeit smoothing the text and correcting many mistakes.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Nattier 2008, p. 25
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Dao'an's former disciple Sengrui, who assisted Kumārajīva in the translation of this sūtra clearly states in his preface (as I will argue in the Chapt.3 of this work, Sengrui's preface probably referred to a different translation of the same sūtra previously undertaken by Kumārajīva himself): 「既蒙究摩羅法師正玄文，摘幽指。始悟前譯之傷本、謬文之乖趣耳。”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites T55, no.2145, p. 58, c25-29
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“He assisted Dao'an in the translation of the Vinaya scriptures and later joined Kumārajīva and helped him in the translation work 184 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [184]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“According to the sources, he acted as scribe during the translation of the aforementioned Si ahanmu chao jie 四 阿 鋡 暮 抄 解 (Commentary on a Compendium of the Four Āgamas) undertaken in late 382 171 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [171]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It can be stated beyond doubt that the two texts from Dunhuang T2775 and T2776 are actually part 1 and part 2 of the same document.Due to the corruption of the manuscript there is a short missing section between the last part of the former and the first part of the latter.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the above quote Sengzhao describes Kumārajīva as being endowed with two important skills: he understood the doctrinal meaning of the text (jin huanzhong 盡環中) and was proficient enough in the Chinese language for personally translating its letter and explaining it (shan fangyan 善方言).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites T55, no.2145, p. 58, b14-17
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An openly pro-Buddhist position was instead taken by his son Yao Xing 姚興 who succeeded to the throne in 394.A fervent Buddhist himself, he sponsored the huge translation project directed by Kumārajīva.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even though it retained some information deriving from Kumārajīva's explanation, it is clear how the author has already moved away from a literal word-by-word exegesis of the text and is experimenting with new and highly original exegetical approaches and commentarial formats”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in most cases the master approves the renderings, however in few cases he is dissatisfied with them and proposes better solutions.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The three ancient biographies of the master all have a paragraph presenting Kumārajīva's original writings.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“He points out the polysemy of many of these, provides etymologies and supplies explanations based on the cultural context.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In this case Kumārajīva explains why”
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“He also frequently refers to the original Sanskrit version to assess the correctness of terms chosen by the scribes.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Definitions like those mentioned above are found throughout the Commentary and represent an important component of Kumārajīva's exegesis.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In his commentary Kumārajīva frequently refers to the Sanskrit version of the text (I have found in total 28 such references) pointing out slight differences with the Chinese translation, assessing certain renderings, proposing more accurate solutions or even pointing out words which are found in translation but are missing in the original or vice versa.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In these two other cases Kumārajīva points out the fact that, even though the Sanskrit text is slightly different in its wording, the terms chosen in translation are definitively suitable ones.”
boostedn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On a basic level Kumārajīva's commentary clarifies the meaning of words and expressions particularly focusing on terms transliterated from Sanskrit and hence harder to grasp for a Chinese audience.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In this case Kumārajīva makes an interesting comment based on a linguistic remark.Instead of”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On a secondary level he further expands and enriches his explanation by using”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the above quote Kumārajīva's criticism towards the translated text seems stronger than in the previous cases.The rendering is considered”
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many of the commentarial entries dealing with this topic are introduced by the expression”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As pointed out above, Kumārajīva often expands on the text enriching his explanation with a variety of additional materials.One of these expansions might be called”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“SZ: In the foreign country the lascivious men set [red-light] districts separate [from the residential areas].Those bodhisattvas who are still beginners don't even cast a glance [to those places].The great man instead conforms to their lust and shows them their faults” 肇曰。外國婬人別立聚落。凡豫士之流，目不暫顧。而大士同其欲，然 後示其過也。”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Kumārajīva and Sengzhao's comments explaining the meaning of the name “Vaiśālī”: K: “Vai” means “ [land] suitable for [setting up] rice fields”.”Śālī” means “vast”.Its land is a flat and vast adorned [expanse]; SZ: Vaiśālī is the name of a kingdom.[This word] in Chinese means “vast and adorned”.Its land is flat, vast and adorned, hence the name”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The reference to the Brahmans' arrogance is related to the passage of the sūtra text commented upon which reads “when he (=Vimalakīrti) was among brahmans, as the most honored among brahmans he eliminated their arrogance”.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However it is worth pointing out that in Kumārajīva's exegesis mātikās -albeit used with great frequency -do not work on a structural level (i.e.his exposition is not entirely organized on the basis of such numerical lists)”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The city bustled with people and activity: merchants “concluded business deals” 治生諧偶 and people enjoyed themselves in gambling houses 博弈, theatres 戲處 and wine shops 酒肆.There were also brothels 婬舍”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The Japanese monk Chikō 智光 (709 -Hōki era 寶龜 770/781) of the Gangō ji 元興寺 wrote a subcommentary to Jizang's Jingming xuanlun 淨名玄論 [T1780] (the Jōmyō gen ron ryaku jutsu 淨 名玄論略述)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [T1780]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Kumārajīva also explains that “before going to bed the noblemen [used to] give orders to the musicians [so that] when the day was dawning they softly played [a delightful] music [listening to which] they would wake up” 300 .”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Indeed, the fact that he could rely on a vast amount of Chinese texts is confirmed by the fact that in his commentary Chikō quotes a wide array of Buddhist and non-Buddhist sources, to the point that his work -as Kawano well explains 768 -provides some important clues about which Chinese texts circulated in the Japanese temples during the Nara period and how they were used by the Japanese monks.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kawano Kimiko 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As to the political administration, “that city had no king and there were five hundred householders who dealt together with the administrative matters” 297 .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“He was the son Fukuryō fathered when he was still a layman.He is said to have learnt the Sanlun doctrine from Ekan together with his father.Some sources 766 also explicitly state that he traveled back to China at the beginning of the Tang for studying the Sanlun again from its original source; this is why he was later credited with the second transmission of these teachings to Japan.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It was during this era that the earliest preserved example of Buddhist jijie 集解 was composed; this is the Dabo Niepan jing jijie 大般涅槃經集解 (Collected Annotations on the Nirvāṇasūtra) [T1763] 759 edited by Baoliang 寶亮 (444 -509).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [T1763]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As Kumārajīva explains: “unlike the nowadays [Chinese] “Palace Manager” (which was usually an eunuch), according to the foreign customs a virtuous elder whose family has been upright for [various] generations 305 is chosen to cover this position” 306 .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the city great charity assemblies 大施會 (=無遮大會) were held.Kumārajīva explains that “great charity assemblies are of two kinds: one in which [goods] are offered in great quantity without rituals being required; and another one in which the offering is made together with all kinds of rituals and sacrifices which are prescribed in the authoritative books of the heterodox sects” 307 .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This work, which collected annotations by some fifteen commentators, was undertaken in the year 509 at imperial order, and the emperor Wudi 武帝 (464 -549) in person wrote a preface to it 760 .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“and thus it was understood by Zhanran 湛然 (711 -782) in his Concise annotations on the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 維 摩經略疏 (“In the foreign country a virtuous person is put in charge to act as Sanlao and enforce”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For what regards the administration of justice, Sengzhao explains that “in the foreign country all the cities establish an elder, virtuous person to act as magistrate.He settles disputes at the city level” 301 .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The production of collected annotations particularly flourished during the Southern Liang 南梁 (502 -557).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the city there were also schools 學堂 where children were taught 295 and debate halls 講論處 where spokesmen of different doctrines challenged each other in debate.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Their rich income often made them greedy, since “the more riches they accumulated the deeper their greed and attachment became” 299 .”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In fact, during those times “there were in India many different [philosophical] sects, each one claiming to be superior to the others.Hence, that kingdom set up a separate discussion-hall for the purpose of stating which one was the most valuable.Those who wanted to expose their doctrine gathered the crowds by the sound of drums, then they [all] went to the hall for debating [with their opponents]”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A native of Koguryŏ, he traveled to China during the Sui dynasty and studied the Sanlun doctrines under Jizang.In 625 he moved to Japan and resided at the Gangō ji, where he lectured on the Three Treatises.He is considered the actual founder of the Japanese Sanron.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There were palaces in Vaiśālī with many palace maids; they were supervised by a “Palace Manager” 內官.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A native of the Wu 吳 region in Southern China, he studied Sanlun under Ekan and was also instructed directly from Jizang.Once in Japan he is known to have preached on the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Those householders 居士 or “white-robed” 白衣 were extremely wealthy 298 and enjoyed a luxurious lifestyle being served by “subordinates” 眷屬 and “wearing richly decorated clothing” 服寶飾.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“and later on by Zhiyuan 智圓(976 -1022)in his Weimojing lüeshu chuiyu ji 維摩經略疏垂裕記 (“[my] present master says [this means] 'to enforce the law of the state', [whereas] Sengzhao [had previously] said 'settle disputes on the city level'.There is little difference between the two.In our country during the Han times every city established a Sanlao” 304 ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If we examine the names of the literati who covered this post along the years 809 we find that the above mentioned Zhao Anren 趙安仁 (957 -1018) and Xia Song 夏竦 (985 -1051) figure prominently among them.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“colophon reproduced in T1775 is indeed typical of the early printed Buddhist texts 817 and normally (along with references to its collators, revisers etc.) it would also provide information about the printing.However, in this case references to printing are missing.”
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“3. Wudi had studied the Nirvāṇa texts widely circulating in the South, but had also apprehended the doctrines of the Northern Buddhism from the Korean monk Sŭngnang 僧朗 (fl.476 -512), a disciple of Fadu 法度 (437 -500), who triggered the revival of the Northern Mādhyamika in the South 771 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Plassen 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The Institute with three halls -a translation hall (yijing tang 譯經堂) in the center, a hall for the stylists (runwen tang 潤文堂) in the east, and a hall for the philological assistants (zheng yi tang 正義堂) in the west -was completed in the sixth lunar month of 982.804”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Li Fan was the son of Li Bi 李泌 (722 -789) from Jingzhao 京兆 (i.e.Chang'an), a Tang scholar and statesman 783 who had inherited from his father Li Chengxiu 李承休 (d.u.) an imposing private library 784 , which he enlarged and further organized.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As explained above, all the Stylists working at the center were accomplished literati; besides having a keen interest for Buddhism, many of them held well stocked libraries being among the major book collectors of their age 820 .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After Li Bi had passed away, the library was inherited by Li Fan who moved it to Suizhou 隨州 (Hubei Province) where he had resettled for covering the position of Regional Inspector (cishi 刺史).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Chao Gongwu proudly mentions his ancestor Chao Jiong in the preface to his catalogue Junzhai dushu zhi 郡齋 讀書誌: “Gongwu's family starting from Mr. Wenyuan for seven generation has made literature its profession.Hence the family owns a large quantity of books” 公武家自文元公來，以翰墨為業者七世，故家多書”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The main translators -who were ordered to take residence in the Institute -were the three leading Indian monks then present in China, viz. the Kaśmīri Tianxizai 天息災 (Devaśāntika?, d. 1000) and Fahu 法護 (Dharmarakṣa, 963 -1058) who had reached Kaifeng together in 980, plus Shihu 施護 (Dānapāla, fl.970s) from the state of Uḍḍiyāna in North-east India who arrived at the Northern Song capital in 1004 805”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This scholar-official and Hanlin Academician who lived in the central Zhaode District 昭德坊 of Kaifeng had served as Stylist in the years 1018 -1019 and was a close collaborator of Zhao Anren in many official literary enterprises.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“On the shelves of his celebrated library we find the Collective Guanzhong Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary, a work which he frequently quotes in his Fazang suijin lu 法藏 碎金錄 (B27, no.153, p. 738, b11).”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Once -probably in 823 -the famous prose writer Han Yu 韓愈 (768 -824), with whom he was well acquainted, sent a message in verses to the Buddhist monk Zhu Gejue 諸葛覺 (religious name Danran 淡然) suggesting him to seek refuge in Suizhou, where he could improve his literary education profiting from Li Fan's library and its owner's erudition.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Institute functioned from 980 up to 1082.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The former worked at the Institute as Stylist for a very long period of time (from 1006 to 1017) during which, together with Yang Yi 楊億 (974 -1020), also compiled the Record of the Dharma Treasures [Compiled during the] Dazhongxiangfu [Era]”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The latter were accomplished men of letters who shared an interest for Buddhist texts and doctrines; they were appointed “Officials of Translation and Stylistic Embellishment” (yiwen runwen guan 譯文潤文官) and usually served at the Institute as “Stylists” (runwen 潤文) 807 and compilers of catalogues registering by year the translations completed 808 .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Li Fan was a man of vast erudition and was very familiar with the Buddhist doctrines and with the meditation practices.”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“They were assisted by a number of Chinese monks (among whom the most prominent is no doubt Weijing 惟淨, 973 -1051) 806 and government officials.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“2.Even though during the Southern Liang the doctrinal interests of the scholar-monks had turned to the Nirvāṇasūtra and other tathāgatagarbha scriptures, Wudi still highly valued the study of the Prajñāpāramitā texts and in his Preface to a Commentary on the Larger Prajñāpāramitā 注 解大品序 (preserved in Chu sanzang jiji [T2145], vol.8, p. 53, b28-p.54, c11)) speaks in favor of an integration of the”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [T2145]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To this another brief annotation is added mentioning a certain “Li Fan 李繁 who lived under the Tang” 782 , proving that such men was well acquainted with this work.”
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The list of the literati who are known to have served as Stylists include Zhang Zi 張洎 (933-1996), Yang Yue 湯悅 (d.u.), Yang Li 楊礪 (930 -999), Zhu Ang 朱昂 (925 -1007), Liang Zhouhan 梁周翰 (929 -1009), Zhao Anren 趙安仁 (958 -1018), Yang Yi 楊億 (974 -1020), Chao Jiong 晁 迥 (951 -1034), Xia Song 夏竦 (985 -1051), Ding Wei 丁謂 (966 -1037), Wang Qinruo 王欽若 (962 -1025), Lü Yijian 呂夷簡 (979 -1044), Song Shou 宋綬 (991”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary is a collection of explanatory annotations on the Chinese version of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa produced in the year 406 by the great translator 1 from Kucha Kumārajīva 鳩摩羅什 (344 -413).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary (Zhu Weimojie jing 注維摩詰經 [T1775]) traditionally ascribed to Sengzhao 僧肇 (384 -414)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites T1775
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it provides us with a privileged viewpoint on the complex and multifaceted process of creative re-interpretation and appropriation of Buddhism during an age which constitutes a turning point in the long history of this momentous cultural acquisition 15 .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“Kumārajīva, who had lived in a Chinese cultural environment long enough for becoming acquainted with its fundamental characteristics, was fully aware of the fact that he had to adapt his teaching to a wholly different cultural environment even at the cost of sacrificing important features of the original message 14 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gaoseng zhuan [T2059], p. 332, b24-29
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this text allows us to glimpse into their different approaches and exegetical strategies, and to make comparisons between them.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“modern Chinese studies have too often overlooked the commentary's role as a genre of philosophical expression”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Makeham 2003, p. 4
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the text as a whole (including its style and content) is addressed to a Chinese audience and aims primarily at clarifying ideas and conceptions presented in the sūtra by rephrasing them in terms familiar to the Chinese devotees.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“as he clearly realized, notwithstanding their sacred nature, they were nevertheless inevitably subjected to oversights and mistakes”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the study of early Mahāyāna Buddhist exegesis in India is bound to rely mainly on materials which survive only in Chinese and present big problems of attribution”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Being so, there is little doubt that the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa was much more in tune with the Chinese literary conventions and taste than the often long-winded and repetitive Prajñāpāramitā texts.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: The majority of Chinese Classics are very short and compact, and this laconic style was highly praised by literati.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa does not seem to have ever been popular in India where, as far as we known, not a single commentary has been dedicated to it 59 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Silk 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites McRae 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa 49 is an early Mahāyāna sūtra composed in India probably at the beginning of the Common Era 50 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Lamotte 1987
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Fussman 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Not only this scripture had a strong impact on Buddhist thought, it also deeply influenced philosophy, literature and the visual arts 62”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Mather 1968 source
- Not matchedcites Demieville 1987
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa can be described as a”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hamlin 1988
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“hence it would hardly be possible to understand and fully appreciate its formal features, its nature and significance without clarifying this historical evolution.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many of the stylistic features of this work were surprisingly in tune with the practice of qingtan 清談 (the”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The practice of qingtan was extremely popular among northern gentry families resettled in the Yangtze delta during the 4th and 5th centuries.
In the paper
“Silk's interpretation represents no doubt an interesting hypothesis, which however does not seem to be supported by Kumārajīva's commentary; in fact, in no place does the Kuchean master clearly”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Silk 2014
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“having carried with himself from the Western Lands a large quantity of Buddhist texts 81 he started a translation activity which would make him the most prolific translator of his time and the greatest before Kumārajīva.82”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chu sanzang jiji [T2145]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Wang Tiejun 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The fact that this sūtra was more a compendium of the Mahāyāna philosophy than an original elaboration on a specific teaching or doctrine may well be one of the reasons why, albeit meeting the literary taste of Chinese literati, it never became the scriptural basis for any of the Sinitic Buddhist School flourished during the Sui and Tang dynasties 67 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“However, its importance was overshadowed by Chang'an 長安 during the Western Jin 西晉 (265 -316), when the polyglot Yuezhi 月支 78 missionary Dharmarakṣa (Zhu Fahu 竺法護, active ca.266 -308) moved there from Dunhuang 79 around 265 AD and started an intense missionary activity”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Boucher 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Kumārajīva's new version produced in 406 immediately became the standard version adopted by the large majority of the commentators during the subsequent ages.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(this notwithstanding, the sūtra explicitly considers entering the monastic order as the main pathway for achieving the highest goal of spiritual life, i.e. anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi -complete, perfect enlightenment -).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The Chinese exegesis of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa -an exercise which along the ages led to the production of a very consistent amount of works 73 presenting different features, formats and approaches -must have started quite early since we possess fragments of commentaries based upon Zhi Qian's version of the text 74 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Shi Guopu 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“We can easily imagine how in the eyes of the cultured Chinese of that age, the three features described above drew the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa very near to the Zhuangzi”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Mair 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Mather 1968 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, having Vimalakīrti as its hero, the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa seemed to attribute a very high status to the lay practitioners, suggesting that they could surpass in wisdom the gods, ordained monks and even the Buddha's disciples”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“started an intense missionary activity that greatly fostered the development of the local Buddhist community which included both members of the gentry (shi 士) and common people (shu 庶).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“by Dharmarakṣa's times this had already assumed the form of a collective enterprise articulated in a three-fold process 86 which was to remain essentially unchanged till the mid-5 th century:”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Boucher 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“It was most likely after fleeing to Huoze 濩澤 (West of Yangcheng 陽城 Xian, Shanxi)around 350 AD -that Dao'an, thanks to the influence of learned monks like Zhu Faji 竺法濟, Zhi Tanjiang 支曇講 and Zhu Sengfu 竺僧輔 102 , began to question the geyi approach and tried instead to make sense of the difficult passages in the Buddhist scriptures by focusing on textual analysis”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tu Yanqiu 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Chu sanzang jiji [T2145]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“But they built upon the basis laid by the translators of the late third and fourth centuries, notably on the translation idioms developed by Dharmarakṣa and his school […] 92”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“it is undoubtedly true that it was he (i.e.Dharmarakṣa) who made from the hitherto rather insignificant Buddhist community at Chang'an the major Buddhist center in Northern China, thus laying the foundations of the work which, some seventy years after his death, would be resumed by Dao'an and completed by Kumārajīva and his school.85”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Dharmarakṣa's translations generally followed this modus operandi 89 with the only peculiarity that, the Yuezhi translator sometimes”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Boucher 1996
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Chu sanzang jiji [T2145]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“it appears that the translation work at his time was still a matter of private enterprise, being financed by the many lay followers and interested people that surrounded him.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Wang Tiejun 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedn = 20- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“the”
- Also stated in: § 2. Later developments: Dao'an's translation activity in Chang'an (379 -385) · plain
“this practice was intended as a hermeneutical expedient and had nothing to do with translation; 3.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Mair 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 2. Later developments: Dao'an's translation activity in Chang'an (379 -385) · plain
In the paper
“he and his collaborators elaborated a Buddhist scriptural style that was to be widely employed and perfected by his successors.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“He made for the first time available to the Chinese public or re-translated a number of fundamental Mahāyāna sūtras 83 which were to meet with enormous popularity 84 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chu sanzang jiji [T2145]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“the latter settled down in the capital city Chang'an 長安 96 and resumed the missionary activity stared by Dharmarakṣa some 70 years after his death contributing more than anyone else to the growth of Buddhism not only in Chang'an but in the whole empire 97 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in explaining the meaning of the sūtras the principle of”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“During the Han dynasty 東漢 (25 -220 AD) the standard official interpretation of the Classics was based on the idea of the intimate correspondence and mutual influence between the cosmos and the human world (tian ren ganying 天人感應): the Classics embodied a cosmic truth that, however, was not self-evident in the surface text and the exegetes had to expose it by pointing out the correspondences between”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tang Yongtong 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Wagner 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“this was called the”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Feng Youlan 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Wagner 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“at their arrival in Chang'an the foreign masters 127 knew no or very little Chinese; when invited by Dao'an to recite a certain scripture (which they carried with themselves or knew by heart) they issued 出 it in the original language and the actual translation was made (in most cases) by the Chinese polyglot Zhu Fonian 竺 佛 念 128”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Palumbo 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Dao'an was constantly haunted by doubts about the correctness of his interpretation of the scriptures and maintained a fundamentally skeptical attitude on the possibility of grasping their true message.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gaoseng zhuan [T2059]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“he also used glosses for explaining the meaning of certain characters in the specific context in which they were found, he exposed the essential meaning of particularly difficult passages, and clarified the structure of the whole scripture by dividing it into a certain number of sections dealing with specific topics (thus applying for the first time the kepan 科判 parceling method that would become”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tu Yanqiu 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“as Tang Yongtong recognizes, Dao'an is the first important author of commentaries on Buddhist texts 103”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Tang Yongtong 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Wang Bi's approach rejected the legitimacy of any reading strategy based on material or thought imposed from outside, and established the notion of the text as basically self-illuminating unit where the primary material for explanation and interpretation had to be taken from the text itself.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wagner 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“During his subsequent long residence in the city of Xiangyang 襄陽 (365 -379) 108 the great master had applied this critical spirit to the study of the Prajñāpāramitā texts: he collected as many scriptures were available and extensively studied and compared them trying to make sense of their many obscure passages and writing explanatory commentaries.He also composed the first known catalogue of”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the translation enterprise Dao'an acted as”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Literal translation and the use of annotations as a bridge to the understanding of a text mark the point of arrival of Dao'an's exegetical quest.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it seems clear that the Buddhist master kept in high regard and wanted to emulate their particular style of scholarship, which was characterized in primis by a high respect for the original texts and an accurate investigation of their meaning through a rigorous philological approach.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Dao'an's opinion, the Chinese classics which passed down the words of the sages of old had an authoritative status comparable to that of the Buddhist sūtras.They couldn't be surreptitiously altered in order to suite the modern taste”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“he developed and perfected the three-fold translation scheme which has been described above and adapted it each time to the specific circumstances of every translation, also choosing the most appropriate person for each duty.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Palumbo 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“These views are notoriously difficult to interpret consistently 131 and even after many scholars have discussed them proposing different explanations 132 , Hurvitz and Link have admitted that”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hurvitz and Link
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Mutatis mutandis, the change of Dao'an's attitude towards the translated Buddhist texts during his lifetime reminds the evolution of Chinese historiography as it has been described by Feng Youlan 馮友蘭 (1895 -1990)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Feng Youlan
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“I propose to understand them not as rules dictated to the translators but rather as general observations crystallizing years of experience in the field of translation and exegesis”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Zheng Xuan's methodology was to edit a recension based on available texts, and in his commentaries add glosses to difficult words, provide historical context and other information as needed, and offer some interpretation.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Asselin
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the shift from the Dao'an's era to the Kumarajva's one was by no means characterized by an abrupt change; rather, it was a transition in which the personnel trained under Dao'an played a fundamental role”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The oral exegesis delivered by the master and sometimes even parts of the question-and-answer debate with the audience were noted down by monks, and those written materials constituted the basis for the compositions of commentaries on the scripture.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“As it has been observed by Zürcher, the personal involvement of the ruling clan in the Buddhist activities constitutes a typical feature of Northern Buddhism and has to be related to the authoritarian and even despotic personal leadership which was part of the still strong tribal background of the non-Chinese ethnic groups ruling over Northern China; this contrasted with the more diffuse patronage”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The presence of such large assemblies is directly related to the huge growth of the Buddhist community in Chang'an promoted by the ruling clan and to the presence at court of such a great translator and scholar as Kumārajīva whose command of the Chinese language allowed for the delivery of a thorough and articulated explanation of the Buddhist texts that were being translated, thus turning the act”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“they could build upon the foundation already laid by Dao'an and his imperial patron.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Zürcher
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary 注維摩詰經 [T1775] preserved under Sengzhao's name is a typical product of Kumārajīva's translation enterprise and we can find in it all the above mentioned socio-historical and cultural forces at work.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“with Kumārajīva the role of exegesis became instead central, to the point that the translation ground turned into a lecture hall attended by monks and laymen who had for the first time the chance to get instructed on countless doctrinal, exegetical and cultural matters related to the foreign religion and to directly question the foreign master on words and expressions used in the text.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Not only Dao'an created the necessary conditions for the success of Kumārajīva's translation enterprise but also, having known about his presence in the Western Kingdoms, repeatedly exhorted the king Fu Jian to make arrangements for bringing him to Chang'an.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In turn, a careful analysis of this composite and multilayered document can add more details to the general picture that has been sketched above from a genealogical perspective.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the hypothesis that Sengzhao was the scribe is not to be discarded in principle.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Even though -as we have seen -this translation enterprise inherited procedures and know-how from the previous era, a number of important innovations were made which I briefly point out below 190 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [190]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“it is likely that while Sengrui served as scribe in an earlier version of the same scripture produced by Kumārajīva (only few fragments of this work have been preserved), Sengzhao occupied this position when the second version was produced (this is actually the version that has been passed down to us).”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The simultaneous mastery of these two expertises by one man was somehow unprecedented in Chinese Buddhist history where often those who knew the doctrine couldn't translate and those who could translate were not competent in exegesis.”
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Correctness is understood as fidelity to the literal meaning, and from this perspective Kumārajīva is again harshly criticized.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, Kumārajīva's commentary is likely to represent a rather faithful transcript (albeit surely revised and rearranged) of his oral explanation; in fact, it does not exhibit the structure of a written composition and is instead characterized by a quite free elaboration on the text frequently resorting to the use of expository devices typical of the oral explanation”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“During the translation of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa the translator not only orally produced a Chinese version of the scripture but also provided a detailed explanation of its terms and doctrinal contents.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Sengzhao's preface
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, the master often had to deal with concepts that were new to the Chinese and could not rely on any existing equivalent that could match them, so to convey those ideas to his Chinese assitants must have been a real challenge.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Kuiji's bold conclusion is that”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [260]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [261]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“first, the fact that Kuiji blames Sengzhao for a biased translation of a term surely reflects a true fact, viz.Kumārajīva heavily relied on the help of his Chinese assistants, who were responsible for many of the renderings adopted”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the Kuchean master is blamed for having mistranslated the very title of the sūtra: instead of The Vimalakīrtisūtra delivered by the Buddha or The Vimalakīrtisūtra or other possible solutions he,”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [258]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“from a doctrinal point of view the Kuchean master can be described as a devoted advocate of the Mahāyāna teachings 235 , and the fact that his translation work mainly focused on the sūtras and śāstras of the Great Vehicle clearly proves his intention to transmit this particular set of teachings to China.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary shows how Kumārajīva is deeply aware of these pitfalls and tries to find an acceptable middle way between those two positions by carefully combining translation and comment”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We know for the above quote that Sengzhao personally attended the translation ground and annotated the explanations he had heard”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Only the Gaoseng zhuan adds to the latter the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary, this work being actually the only surviving original work by the master, exception made for some epistles addressed to Huiyuan 慧遠 written sometime after 405 and preserved in Dasheng yi zhang”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such teamwork represented perhaps the only effective strategy for overcoming the individual limitations and for reducing the margin of error through a careful crosscheck.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some monks attending the translation jotted down notes (ji 記) recording the oral exegesis, and these materials later served as a basis for the composition of written commentaries.”
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As it appears from his biography, Kumārajīva's knowledge of the Buddhist doctrines and theories was broad and eclectic, including such early collections as the Āgamas as well as the monumental doctrinal systematizations of the Sarvāstivāda school”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The same holds true for Daosheng's commentary, which was surely composed later than Kumārajīva and Sengzhao's ones 230 , probably during the first years after the monk's return to the South.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such an apparent contradiction can be explained bearing in mind the great divide between the spoken and written forms of the Chinese language: it is likely that Kumārajīva was quite well acquainted with the spoken Chinese of the time, but when it came to deal with the literary conventions and the subtleties of the written language -whose grammar was in many ways diametrically opposed to Sanskrit -”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, at the same time, in order to make his translations as readable and familiar as possible to a Chinese audience, Kumārajīva adapted to the Chinese literary style and conventions giving ample space to his Chinese collaborators in shaping the final version of the text.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As to Kumārajīva's Chinese proficiency, even though the Kuchean master's command of Chinese was often praised by his Chinese disciples 239 , we also find in the sources numerous references to his awkward explanations and his very approximate Chinese renderings 240 .”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Under such premises the debate on the meaning of the text which was at the very heart of the translation practice -and of which the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary is an important witness -was no doubt essential for overcoming the great conceptual, cultural and linguistic gaps.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since his arrival in Chang'an Kumārajīva mainly devoted his efforts to rendering in Chinese some veritable foundational works of the Mahāyāna: he retranslated the Larger Prajñāpāramitā 大品 (its final revision was carried out in 404) and its huge commentary, the Da zhidu lun 大智度論 (completed in 405), adding to them the Hundred Verses Treatise 百論 (404).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Being exemplary in their precision, clarity and concision they were to be quoted in many important Buddhist lexicographic works of later ages constituting an authoritative reference material for those compilers.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [268]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact, it was up to the scribes, upon listening to his oral translation and exegesis, to choose the most suitable Chinese wording, to revise the text and then edit the final version.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Kumārajīva's version represents a fair compromise between the two options: he manages to keep the text very readable and at the same time maintains the”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Facing this unprecedented bulk of linguistic, philosophical and ethnographic information the Chinese Buddhists perhaps for the first time came to see India as an authoritative”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In his attempt to make the Chinese audience acquainted with the Indian cultural background Kumārajīva adopts different strategies or”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Not only the definitions contained in this commentary made a contribution to the study of lexicography and the composition of Buddhist lexicons, but many of the criteria for choosing the Chinese rendering of Sanskrit terms adopted by Kumārajīva and sometimes explicated in his annotations were to be followed by other translators after him and finally codified under the Tang by Xuanzang.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fayun
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirectn = 5- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The dharma master Xuanzang clarified the five cases in which one should not translate [and should instead use transliteration]:”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fayun
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainn = 5- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reference to the Sanskrit version accompanied by the comment constitutes a well-argued endorsement of the translation and it perhaps describes the process through which that final term was chosen.”
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Incidentally, this might well be one of the not infrequent cases in which the Kuchean master attaches to the generic term xiang 相”
- Also stated in: § a. · plain
“such interpretation (and even the use of the term xiang 相) is absent from Zhi Qian and Xuanzang's translation of the same passage.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [32]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § a. · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“if Zhi Qian's translation had an evident domesticating bias in terms of lexical choice, Xuanzang's one tended to foreignize as much as possible in an attempt to reproduce almost verbatim the original Sanskrit.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Chinese versions of the same mythical events narrated here are found in the Dīrgha Āgama 長阿含經 [T1] translated by Buddhayaśas 佛陀耶舍 and Zhu Fonian 竺佛念, and the Mahasammata-raja 《眾許摩訶帝經》 [T191] translated by Faxian 法顯”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [T1]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [T191]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“thanks to his mastery of the Chinese language and his vast erudition, the Kuchean translator was able to introduce them to the richness and complexities of Indian civilization, thus greatly contributing to fill this knowledge gap.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Before Kumārajīva arrived in Chang'an, Chinese Buddhists had only a very vague and approximate idea of the Indian milieu in which Buddhism arose and developed.
In the paper
“The use of such numerical lists of items included in different categories (which are known in Pāli as mātikās; Skt., mātṛkās) is typical of much of Indian philosophical literature”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gethin 1992
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In all the cases related above the explanation of categories is inessential for the understanding of the text and is meant to expand on the sūtra relating some additional information to the audience.Sometimes, like in the last quote, it serves to give more depth to a certain image or metaphor that is used in the text.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The adoption of such culture-oriented approach is one of the main features of Kumārajīva's exegesis of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa and it surely led to a substantial advance in the knowledge of the Indian lore by the Chinese Buddhists.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It seems clear, for example, that even though Kumārajīva's oral comment was noted down by some monks attending the translation of the sūtra, afterwards it was personally revised and rearranged by himself while also checking the Chinese rendering of the sūtra text.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a matter of fact, Kumārajīva appears to be deeply aware of the fact that it would have been impossible to transmit the Buddhist religion without contextualizing its teachings and practices into a broader cultural background.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Rather, the impression is that the Kuchean master adapted such ancient expository tool to the new task of transmitting the doctrine to a foreign audience: given that the content of mātikās was very varied and encompassed a wide range of topics, he probably thought they could represent an easy and effective way of introducing the Chinese believers to the Indian cultural universe.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“in the first place mātikās represent a mnemonic device enabling one to remember and organize through a sort of ideal”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gethin 1992
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, belonging to a sort of meta-text, they give us the chance to look into the process through which the commentary itself was composed.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence Chikō was the repository of a master-disciple transmission of teachings from Jizang himself which dated back just one generation before, and certainly could rely on a vast corpus of first hand materials from China and well documented information passed down by his teacher.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Chikō is among the most important figures of Japanese Sanron; a very prolific, authoritative and highly influential commentator of Buddhist scriptures of the mid-Nara period 764”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We do not know precisely what is the source of Chikō's statement; however, there are good reasons for taking it into serious regard.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The Sanlao was “a man of good character more than 50 years old, responsible for providing moral leadership and discipline” 302”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hucker 1985
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The term sanlao 三老 seems to be used here as a general name indicating a person belonging to one of the three stages of old age (presumably the 50s, 60s and 70s), however it clearly recalls the proper name Sanlao 三老, an official position in the Chinese administrative system established since the Qin-Han dynasties.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Hanazuka has substantiated the hypothesis that the Collective Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary was first assembled by Wudi 武帝 with the following further arguments 769 :”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hanazuka Hisayoshi 1982
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“4. Being the emperor, not a Buddhist monk, Wudi was not involved in any sectarian competition between different Buddhist schools, hence he did not privileged any of them, and for this reason in editing the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary he did not show a preference for Daosheng (who must have enjoyed a much greater fame in the South than Kumārajīva and Sengzhao) and was unbiased in assembling the”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The bodhisattva career goes through a progression of ten stages (Skr. bhūmi), shi zhu 十住.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Jianbei yiqie zhide jing 漸備一切智德經
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Shizhu jing 十住經
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Dazhidulun 大智度論
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is more than natural that copies of the newly translated or collated texts made their way from the Institute onto the shelves of their private libraries and were then quoted in their own works.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“1.The term jijie “collected explanations” used by Chikō is also found in the title of the Daban niepan jing jijie 大般涅槃經集解, the major work composed under the Southern Liang by Baoliang 寶亮 at the order of the Emperor Wudi.There is a strong connection between the two texts for what regards their editing and outlook.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Li Fan, who lived under the Tang, said that the attribution [of this collection to Sengzhao (?)] has been made by later literati” 唐李繁頗言此注後人依託者”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chao Gongwu 1990
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“These seven commentarial works are: 1.「維摩經疏一部四卷 (開中 (read as 關中) 道液法師造)；2. 維摩經釋 批 (read as 抄) 一部三 (read with variant 二) 卷 (開中 (read as 關中) 道液法師造)；3. 維摩經開中 (read as 關中) 疏記一部五卷 (文襲禪師造)；4. 維摩經略例一部二卷 (智深法師造)；5. 維摩經玄旨一卷 (漢涌法師造)；6. 維 摩經開 (read as 關) 中疏科文一卷 (開 (read as 關) 中道液法師造)；7. 維摩經五教義一卷 (文襲禪師造)」”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 常曉和尚請來目錄
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Ennin, Jōgyō and Eichō have all recorded this work in their respective catalogues”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 入唐新求聖教目錄
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites 常曉和尚請來目錄
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites 東域傳燈目錄
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper relies on this without support.
In China, classical texts were commonly read with the aid of commentaries at least since the second century AD, and commentary was the genre in which most Chinese thinkers exercised their talents.
“in China classical texts were commonly read with the aid of commentaries at least since the second century AD, and commentary was actually the genre in which most Chinese thinkers exercised their talents.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary is one of the main sources we possess on the thought of the early 5th century.
“which is one of the main sources we possess on the thought of that period.”
The paper relies on this without support.
No comprehensive study has been dedicated to the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary.
“the fact that so far no comprehensive study has been dedicated to it made it worth (if not even necessary) to undertake the task.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The majority of Chinese Classics are very short and compact, and this laconic style was highly praised by literati.
“As a matter of fact, the majority of the Chinese Classics (e.g. the Confucian Analects, the Laozi, Sunzi's Art of War) are very short in size and compact in their exposition, and since very early times this essential and laconic style was particularly praised by literati.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The practice of qingtan was extremely popular among northern gentry families resettled in the Yangtze delta during the 4th and 5th centuries.
“which was extremely popular among the members of the northern gentry families who had re-settled in the Yangtze delta during the 4 th and 5 th centuries.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The study of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary directly relates to the narrative, literary features and philosophical content of the sūtra itself.
“Given that the study of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary I am about to undertake directly relates to the narrative, the literary features and the philosophical content of the sūtra itself”
The paper relies on this without support.
Sengrui was one of Kumārajīva's closest collaborators and served as scribe for many of his translations, also writing prefaces to many of them.
“Sengrui was one of the closest collaborators of Kumārajīva and acted as scribe in the translation of many fundamental scriptures delivered by the Kuchean master, writing also prefaces to many of them.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Xuanzang's translations, despite his fame and popularity, were appreciated only by a restricted group of specialized readers with advanced and specific understanding of Indian Buddhism.
“However, Xuanzang's fame and popularity notwithstanding, his translations were appreciated only by a restricted group of”
The paper relies on this without support.
In the early fifth century, it was still hard for the Chinese to deal with a language whose script was based on sounds rather than visual meaningful units like Chinese characters.
“In the early fifth century it must have been still hard for the Chinese to come to terms with the many problems deriving from dealing with a language whose script was based on sounds (phonograms) rather than visual meaningful units like the Chinese characters (logograms).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Before Kumārajīva arrived in Chang'an, Chinese Buddhists had only a very vague and approximate idea of the Indian milieu in which Buddhism arose and developed.
“No doubt, before Kumārajīva's arrival in Chang'an the Chinese Buddhists had a very vague and approximate idea of the Indian milieu in which Buddhism as a religion and a way of life arose and developed;”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Hyegwan met both Fukuryō and his son Chizō at Jizang's place.
“however, it is probably safe to assume that Hyegwan had met both Fukuryō and his son Chizō at Jizang's place.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 1. The foundations: Dharmarakṣa's 76 activity in Chang'an 77
“During his activity in Chang'an, from 266 to 308 Dharmarakṣa is credited with having translated more than 150 texts”
§ 1. The foundations: Dharmarakṣa's 76 activity in Chang'an 77
“Dharmarakṣa left Chang'an with his disciples around the year 304 when the Disorders of the Eight Princes 八王之亂 (291 -306) 94 had thrown the city into chaos and headed east.He did not come farther than Mian Chi 澠池 near Luoyang; there he fell ill and died at the age of 78.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 1.2.2.4 References to Indian society and cultural background
“Zhao Anren 趙安仁 (957 -1018)”
§ 1.2.2.4 References to Indian society and cultural background
“Zhao Anren 趙安仁 (958 -1018)”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 5. Outline of this thesis
“in the year 980 at the orders of Emperor Taizu 太祖”
§ 5. Outline of this thesis
“Emperor Taizu 太祖 (r.960 -976)”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ 5. Outline of this thesis
“Eastern Han (206 BC -220 AD)”
§ 1. The foundations: Dharmarakṣa's 76 activity in Chang'an 77
“Eastern Han 東漢 (25 -220 AD)”
Citations
Cites
A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China
Teng, S. Y., & Hucker, C. O. (1986) · The American Historical Review · doi:10.2307/1858260 · Cited by 556
Holcombe, C., & Lewis, M. E. (2000) · The American Historical Review · doi:10.2307/2652466 · Cited by 353
(2000) · Harvard University Asia Center eBooks · Cited by 196
The Classic of Changes: A New Translation of the "I Ching" as Interpreted by Wang Bi
Lynn, R. J. (1994) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 153
Makeham, J. (2003) · Harvard University Asia Center eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctt1tg5j9s · Cited by 135
The Literature of the Madhyamaka School of Philosophy in India
Thurman, R. Α. F., & Ruegg, D. S. (1985) · Journal of the American Oriental Society · doi:10.2307/601746 · Cited by 133
Medieval Chinese Warfare 300-900
Graff, D. A. (2003) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203206683 · Cited by 132
(2003) · Cited by 106
The Eminent Monk: Buddhist Ideals in Medieval Chinese Hagiography
Campany, R. F., & Kieschnick, J. (2001) · Journal of the American Oriental Society · doi:10.2307/606509 · Cited by 106
Poetry and Personality: Reading, Exegesis, and Hermeneutics in Traditional China
Bokenkamp, S. R. (1991) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 89
Research works printed but not linked: 176
- Cf. Zeng yi ahan jing 增壹阿含經 [T125], vol. 1, p. 549, a17-18 166 Cf. Sengjialuocha suo ji jing 僧伽羅剎所集經 [T194], vol. 1, p. 115, c5-6 167
- Cf. Zun Poxumi pusa suo ji lun 尊婆須蜜菩薩所集論 [T1549], vol. 1, p. 721, a29-b1 168
- Cf. Chu sanzang jiji [T2145], vol. 13, p. 99, c11-14. On Fahe's movements after leaving Dao'an's translation group in Chang'an see Palumbo 2013, pp. 64 -66 169 Cf. Gaoseng zhuan [T2059], vol. 5, p. 354, a26 170 Cf. Gaoseng zhuan [T2059], vol. 2, p. 332, b29-c3 171
- Cf. the anonymous preface to the Commentary on a Compendium of the Four Āgamas (Si ahanmu chao jie 四阿 鋡暮抄解 [T1505], vol. 1, p. 1, a14-16); see also Sengyou's record on the production of the same scripture -which is here called Compendium of the Four Āgamas (Si ahanmu chao jing 四阿鋡暮抄經) (Chu sanzang jiji [T2145], vol. 2, p. 10, b13) 172
- Cf. 予既知命遇此真化 (Chu sanzang jiji [T2145], vol. 8, p. 53, a28-p. 52, c28) 173
- Cf. 「沙門僧叡才識高朗，常隨什傳寫。」(Chu sanzang jiji [T2145], vol. 14, p. 101, c7) 174 Cf. for ex. Zhanran's 湛然 words 「"關中四子"即生、肇、融、叡，後人承用"四子"之義」《法華玄 義釋籤》卷 3 (CBETA, T33, no. 1717, p. 837, b1-2); see also the Song monk Zhiyuan 智圓: 「什公門下有十哲、 八俊、四聖。肇皆預焉。生、肇、融、叡為四聖。」《涅槃玄義發源機要》卷 2 (CBETA, T38, no. 1766, p. 23, b6-7) 175
- Cf. for ex. Chu sanzang jiji [T2145], vol. 14, p. 101, c7-13 and Gaoseng zhuan [T2059], vol. 6, p. 364, b2-6 176 Cf. Gaoseng zhuan [T2059], p. 364, a25-b2 186 Cf. Chu sanzang jiji [T2145], vol. 9, p. 64, c13-4) 187 See Gaoseng zhuan [T2059], vol. 7, p. 371, a17-29 188
- Cf. Ming seng zhuan chao 名僧傳抄 [X1523], vol. 1, p. 346, a19 // Z 2B:7, p. 1, a16 // R134, p. 1, a16 189 Cf. Chu sanzang jiji [T2145], vol. 8, p. 53, b7-10) 190 On this important topic see Wang Wenyan 1984 (particularly pp. 218 -235), Cao Shibang 1992, Xiao Shichang 2010 (pp. 181 -252) and Zacchetti 1996 (particularly pp. 365 -369) 191 We read for example in Buddhabhadra's biography that "the Qin sovereign Yao Xing focused on the [study of] Buddhist dharma, [and] supported more than three thousand monks" 「秦主姚興專志佛法，供養三千餘僧」 (Buddhabhadra's biography, in Gaoseng zhuan [T2059], vol. 2, p. 334, b27) 192 For a discussion of Yao Xing's religious policy see LI Gang 2010, pp. 216 -219 312 「設大施會者，關河舊解云："其家祖父邪見，世世恒修邪祠。下祠用羊，中祠宰牛，上祠用人。善得 教化，絕此邪祠，勸修正道，行真檀施。其家大富，四事豐饒。營斯大會，供養一切出家、在家、內道、 外道及諸貧賤。來者無隔，供給所須。期滿七日」《維摩經略疏》卷 6〈菩薩品 4〉 (CBETA, T38, no. 1778, p. 647, a6-12) 313
- 「憶所修福」《注維摩詰經》卷 5〈文殊師利問疾品 5〉 (CBETA, T38, no. 1775, p. 375, b27) 314 什曰。外國法，從生至終所作福業，一 一書記。若命終時，傍人為說，令其恃福，心不憂畏也。《注維 摩詰經》卷 5〈文殊師利問疾品 5〉 (CBETA, T38, no. 1775, p. 375, b27-29) 315 肇曰。恐新學菩薩為疾所亂。故勸憶所修福，悅其情也。《注維摩詰經》卷 5〈文殊師利問疾品 5〉 (CBETA, T38, no. 1775, p. 375, b29-c1) 316 The topic of "Buddhism and healing" has been discussed (mainly on the basis of Chinese sources) by Demé ville (Demé ville 1985). In this work the scholar frequently quotes from the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa (cf. particularly pp. 26 - 28);
- The tridoṣa (san da bing 三大病) -translated in Chinese also as san neizai 三內災 ("the three internal calamities") and san du 三毒 ("the three poisons") -are the pathological Wind (Skt. vāta, vāyu), Phlegm (or Cold) (Skt. śleṣman), and Bile (or Heat) (Skt. pitta)) (cf. Demé ville 1985, p. 65 -71). On the tridoṣa in Chinese Buddhist translations and the problems involved in the translation of Indian medical terms in Chinese see also Salguero 2014, pp. 58 -59 and 80 -81. 319 In Sanskrit respectively Pṛthivī, Ap, Tejas and vāta or vāyu. 320 Zengsun 增損 ("imbalance", lit. "augmentation or diminution") stands for the Sanskrit parivarta (lit. "subversion") (cf. Demé ville 1985, p. 72) 321 什曰。外道經書唯知有三大病，不知地大。佛法中說四大病。病之所生，生於四大增損。四大增損，必
- …。」《注維摩詰經》卷 5〈文殊師利問疾品 5〉 (CBETA, T38, no. 1775, p. 371, c20-23) 359 「此不可思議，自在神通，決定實相經典。」《維摩詰所說經》卷 3〈法供養品 13〉 (CBETA, T14, no. 475, p. 556, a3-4) 360 「如是所說不可思議，自在神變，解脫法門。」《說無垢稱經》卷 6〈法供養品 13〉 (CBETA, T14, no. 476, p. 585, c14-15) 361 「若此純法化者」《佛說維摩詰經》卷 2〈法供養品 13〉 (CBETA, T14, no. 474, p. 535, b13) 362 「依於諸法實相之義。」《維摩詰所說經》卷 3〈法供養品 13〉 (CBETA, T14, no. 475, p. 556, b29) 363 「真實法義之所歸依，」《說無垢稱經》卷 6〈法供養品 13〉 (CBETA, T14, no. 476, p. 586, c12) 364 「為入有義法之正要」《佛說維摩詰經》卷 2〈法供養品 13〉 (CBETA, T14, no. 474, p. 536, a5-6) 365 See on this Tang Yongtong 2000, vol. 1, p. 236 366 Acconding to Da zhidu lun, the three terms 如, 法性 and 實際 represent the absolute in its real aspect; like the nirvāṇa, they are unconditioned dharmas (changfa 常法) (cf. T1509 p. 171, b22-23 and p. 271, c27-29). On the substantial coincidence of these three terms cf. the following passage 「問曰：如、法性、實際，是三事為一？ 為異？若一，云何說三？若三，今應當分別說！答曰：是三皆是「諸法實相」異名。所以者何？凡夫無智， 於一切法作邪觀，所謂常、樂、淨、實、我等。佛弟子如法本相觀，是時不見常，是名無常；不見樂，是 名苦；不見淨，是名不淨；不見實，是名空；不見我，是名無我。若不見常而見無常者，是則妄見；見苦、 空、無我、不淨亦如是，是名為如。如者，如本，無能敗壞。以是故，佛說三法為法印，所謂一切有為法 無常印、一切法無我印、涅槃寂滅印。」《大智度論》卷 32〈序品 1〉 (CBETA, T25, no. 1509, p. 297, c14- 24). Cf. also the following lines up to p. 298, a10. 367 「法同如、法性、實際」《注維摩詰經》卷 2〈弟子品 3〉 (CBETA, T38, no. 1775, p. 346, c26) 368 轉：〔副〕(1) 常用在形容詞前，有時也用在動詞前，表示程度的變化較前為甚，可譯作"更加"、"愈加" 等 (Dong Zhiqiao and Cai Jinghao 1994) 448 "大凡釋章句之注疏(此為文疏之始)，其文較繁。出大意之注疏(此為義疏之始)，其文必簡[…] 前 者釋文而繁，後者談義而略" (Tang Yongtong 2000, vol. 1, p. 416) 449 See on this the following important passage from Jizang's Fahua Xuanlun:「及羅什至長安，翻新《法華》竟， 道融講之開為九轍。時人呼為"九轍法師"。九轍之文，今所未見。講新《法花》始乎融也。」《法華玄 論》卷 1 (CBETA, T34, no. 1720, p. 363, c11-13) 450 On the evolution of the Confucian yishu genre see Mou Runsun 1984, pp. 40 -55, Zhang Baosan 2001, Makehan 2003, pp. 86 et seq. + appendix D; Van Zoeren, pp. 124 -130;
- Dai Junren 1970 and Qiao Xiuyan 2013 (a) 451 In the introduction to his Lotus Sūtra Commentary Daosheng explains the process through which his work was composed: "In my youth, I had the opportunity to attend some lectures sitting humbly in the end row of the hall. […] Since what is stored in one's memory does not [endure] like mustard-seed kalpa and rock kalpa, one would find it impossible to keep it intact forever. Somehow on the days when there were lectures I just jotted down what I had heard of during the day (疏錄所聞). […] Then, during the third month in the spring of the ninth year of the Yuan- chia era (432 A.D.), while residing at the Tung-lin ("Eastern Grove") Monastery (ching-she) on Lu-shan, again I put them in order and rearranged them (又治定之). In addition, after collecting and consulting various versions (採訪眾 本), I edited them into one roll" (transl. from Kim 1990, pp. 348 -349). 452 Cf. 「尋天竺之與震旦，著筆之與口傳，敷經講論者不出二種：一者科章門，二者直解釋。如天親解《涅 槃》有七分，龍樹釋《般若》無章門，蓋是天竺論師開、不開之二類也。河西製《涅槃疏》開為五門，道 融講新《法華》類為九轍，至如集解《淨名》之說、撰注《法華》之文，但拆其玄微又不豫科起盡，蓋是 震旦諸師開、不開兩義也。」《法華義疏》卷 1〈序品 1〉 (CBETA, T34, no. 1721, p. 452, b16-23) 463 「愛好玄微，每以莊老為心要。」《高僧傳》卷 6 (CBETA, T50, no. 2059, p. 365, a10-11) 464 「嘗讀老子德章，乃歎曰。美則美矣。然期 (read as 棲) 神冥累之方，猶未盡善也。」《高僧傳》卷 6 (CBETA, T50, no. 2059, p. 365, a10-13) 465 "後見舊維摩經，歡喜頂受。披尋翫味，乃言：'始知所歸矣！'因此出家" 466 Cf. Zhaolun 肇論 [T1858], p. 152, b7-8; p. 152, b9-10 and p. 152, b23-24. 467 「不面在昔，佇想用勞」《肇論》卷 1 (CBETA, T45, no. 1858, p. 155, b23) 468 「"勞乎文殊師利！不面在昔，辱來相見" 」《佛說維摩詰經》卷 1〈5 諸法言品〉 (CBETA, T14, no. 474, p. 525, c2-3) 469 「學善方等，兼通三藏，及在冠年而名振關輔。時競譽之徒，莫不猜其早達。或千里趍負(read with variant 負糧)入關抗辯。肇既才思幽玄，又善談說。承機挫銳，曾不流滯。時京兆宿儒及關外英彥，莫不挹 其鋒辯，負氣摧䘐」《高僧傳》卷 6 (CBETA, T50, no. 2059, p. 365, a9-19) 470 「姚興命肇與僧叡等入逍遙園，助詳定經論。肇以去聖久遠，文義多 (read with variant 舛) 雜，先舊所解， 時有乖謬」《高僧傳》卷 6 (CBETA, T50, no. 2059, p. 365, a21-23) 471 Cf. Bailun xu 百論序 T1569, p. 167, c11-p. 168, a14; Zhu Weimojiejing xu 注維摩詰經序 T1775, p. 327, a13- b18; Chang Ahanjing xu 長阿含經 T1, p. 1, a4-b6; Fanwang jing xu 梵網經 T1484, p. 997, a18-b5. 472 「讀之稱善，乃謂肇曰："吾解不謝子，辭當相挹"」《高僧傳》卷 6 (CBETA, T50, no. 2059, p. 365, a25- 26) 473 披尋：閱讀、研究。猶"披味" (Wang Yunlu and Fang Yixin 1992, pp. 302 -303) 474 更：〔副〕(1) 表示轉折的語氣。可譯為"卻"、"反而" (Ding Zhiqiao and Cai Jinghao 1994). Cf. also Cai Jinghao 1990, pp. 117 -118. 475 往復: 指賓主問答、清談；爭論、辯難 (Wang Yunlu and Fang Yixin 1992, pp. 378 -380) 476 Sengzhao is also credited with having been praised by Kumārajīva as "having reached a thorough understanding of [Buddhist] emptiness" 解空第一 (such information is related in Zhaolun shu 肇論疏 [T1859] by the Tang commentator Yuankang 元康 who quotes it from the now lost Mingseng zhuan 名僧傳) 517 肇曰。夫萬事萬形，皆四大成。在外則為土木山河，在內則為四支百體。聚而為生，散而為死。生則為 內，死則為外。內外雖殊，然其 (read as 四) 大不異。《注維摩詰經》卷 2〈方便品 2〉 (CBETA, T38, no. 1775, p. 341, b29-c3) 518 故以內外四大，類明無我也。如外地古今相傳，強者先宅，故無主也，身亦然耳，眾緣所成：緣合則起， 緣散則離。何有真宰常主之者？主、壽、人是一我。義立四名也。《注維摩詰經》卷 2〈方便品 2〉 (CBETA, T38, no. 1775, p. 341, c3-7) 519 See for example Zhuangzi: "Life is the companion of death; death is the beginning of life. Who understands their workings? Man's life is a coming-together of breath. If it comes together, there is life; if it scatters, there is death. And if life and death are companions to each other, then what is there for us to be anxious about? 生也死之徒，死 也生之始，孰知其紀！人之生，氣之聚也；聚則為生，散則為死。若死生為徒，吾又何患！(Zhuangzi 莊子， Zhi beyou 知北遊) 520 「肇曰。既得法身入無為境。心不可以智求。形不可以像取。故曰無量。六住已下名有量也。」《注維
- 「維摩經開 (read as 關) 中疏 記一部五卷 (文襲禪師造)」《常曉和尚請來目錄》卷 1 (CBETA, T55, no. 2163, p. 1069, b25-26); 「同[ i.e.凈 名]關中疏記五卷 (無量義寺大(read as 文) 襲撰)」《東域傳燈目錄》卷 1 (CBETA, T55, no. 2183, p. 1151, c18- 19) 729 These seven commentarial works are: 1.「維摩經疏一部四卷 (開中 (read as 關中) 道液法師造)；2. 維摩經釋 批 (read as 抄) 一部三 (read with variant 二) 卷 (開中 (read as 關中) 道液法師造)；3. 維摩經開中 (read as 關中) 疏記一部五卷 (文襲禪師造)；4. 維摩經略例一部二卷 (智深法師造)；5. 維摩經玄旨一卷 (漢涌法師造)；6. 維 摩經開 (read as 關) 中疏科文一卷 (開 (read as 關) 中道液法師造)；7. 維摩經五教義一卷 (文襲禪師造)」《常 曉和尚請來目錄》卷 1 (CBETA, T55, no. 2163, p. 1069, b23-c1) 745 This topic has been previously dealt with by Hanazuka (cf. Hanazuka 1982, pp. 207 -211); the Japanese scholar had collected the materials from works by Zhiyi, Jizang, Zhanran and Chikō which I quote here. In this section I reexamine those sources, add new ones, and enrich the discussion on the topic by providing additional information (e.g. on the Buddhist editorial activities undertaken under Liang Wudi and on Chikō's doctrinal background and his exegetical activity). 746 The content of this text was orally delivered by Zhiyi (538 -597) and then transcribed by his disciple Guanding 灌頂 (561 -627). 747 Cf. Mohe zhiguan 摩訶止觀 [T1911], p. 132, b12-19 748
- It must be pointed out that before the Tang the term Guanzhong shu 關中疏 indicated two different texts, i.e. the collective Annotated Vimalakīrtinirdeśa (this is the case in our quote) and the Nirvāṇasūtra Commentary by Daosheng 道生 (Cf. Guanding's 灌頂 Niepanjing xuanyi wenju 涅槃經玄義文句 [X656], p. 40, a23-b4 // Z 1:56, p. 179, d12-17 // R56, p. 358, b12-17 749 Cf. Zhu Weimojiejing 注維摩詰經 [T1775], p. 351, a13-19 782 "Li Fan, who lived under the Tang, said that the attribution [of this collection to Sengzhao (?)] has been made by later literati" 唐李繁頗言此注後人依託者 (Chao Gongwu 1990, pp. 775 -776) 783
- Quan Tang shi 全唐詩 (1705), vol. 342, n. 23 (Original title: "Addressed to Zhu Gejue, [suggesting him] to go to Suizhou for studying on [Li Fan's] books (at that time Li Fan was the Regional Inspector of Suizhou; [he was the son of] the Grand Councilor [Li] Bi)" 送諸葛覺往隨州讀書 (李繁時為隨州刺史，宰相泌之子也)) 十四日果於荻港之上遇大風暴。起船將覆，沒者數四，僅而獲全。即先言風水之日，夢 中稱曰江饒。舉家脫魚腹之葬，不亦幸乎？屆于京師，遍令求訪《維摩經》十卷者，咸 曰："無之"。不數月，余於所親處覩一經函。發而視之，即《維摩經》一部十卷。 懿夫，金文玉偈之殊勝，海藏龍宮之守護，功德之力，其昭昭乎！其昭昭乎！愚冥之徒 不能起信，深可悲矣！因擇工人，俾之彫刻。志願散施，貴廣傳布，用標靈異。直紀歲 時：聖宋淳化四年八月十五日 道德里序《注維摩詰經》卷 10 (CBETA, T38, no. 1775, p. 419, c14-p. 420, a3) In the year 982 at the beginning of winter I was ordered to go back [to the capital Bianjing 汴 京 (the present-day Kaifeng 開封, Henan Province)] from my position of Rectifier of Omissions of the Right, Auxiliary in the Historiography Office and Jiangnan Transport Commissioner. [Hence] I took a boat with all my family and went down the river. It was October 28 when we moored at the side of Hukou. As the night was falling, a man approximatively on his fifties with fisherman-like dress and appearance greeted us from the river bank. He said: "For generations [my kin] has been living by the river (shuiju 水居) ([original annotation:] in the South there are people living on boat houses, they are called shuiju) and I am able to foreknow [the changes of] wind and water"; he took out from his sleeve a Navigation Chart and offered it [to me] while saying: "On the 14 th day of this month (i.e. November 2) there will be a storm". I made a detailed record in order to remember that unusual event. Moreover, for several nights I dreamed a man dressed in a black robe who emerged from the water with half of his body. He referred to himself as Jiangrao (lit. "Mercy of the river") and wanted [to obtain] the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa [Commentary] in 10 fascicles. I woke up finding [the dream] extraordinary. Indeed, on the 14 th day of the month over Digang we run into a storm which lifted the boat [to the point that] it was about to capsize. Four people drowned but we luckily survived.
- On Xia Song 夏竦 see his biography in Song History 宋史 (vol. 283, Biographies 列傳, n. 42) and the Funerary Stele of Xia Song aka Mr. Wenzhuang 夏文莊公竦神道碑銘 by Wang Gui 王珪 (preserved in Huayang ji 華陽集, vol 47). A useful chronology of Xia Song's life is provided in Sun Gang 2014. BIBLIOGRAPHY Abe, Ryūichi 2007, «Scholasticism, Exegesis, and Ritual Practice On Renovation in the History of Buddhist Writing in the Early Heian Period» , in Mikael Adolphson, Edward Kamens, and Stacie Matsumoto (eds.) 2007, Heian Japan, Centers and peripheries, University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu, pp. 179 -211
- Assmann, Jan and Gladigow, Burkhard (eds.) 1995, Text und Kommentar (Archäologie der literarischen Kommunikation), Wilhelm Fink Verlag, Munich
- Baggio, Giacomo 2010, «Il trattato Vacuità del non-assoluto 不真空論 di Sengzhao 僧肇: analisi e traduzione» , in Phoenix in domo Foscari (n. 2), pp. 7 -68
- Balazs, Étienne 1967, «Nihilistic Revolt or Mystical Escapism: Currents of Thought in China during the Third Century a.d.» , in Balazs, Étienne, Chinese Civilization and Bureaucracy: Variations On A Theme, Yale University Press, New Heaven and London
- Boucher, Daniel 1996, Buddhist Translation Procedures in Third Century China: a Study of Dharmarakṣa and his Translation Idiom, Ph. D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania ─── 2000, «On Hu and Fan Again: The Transmission of 'Barbarian' Manuscripts to China», Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies ─── 2006, «Dharmarakṣa and the Transmission of Buddhism to China» , Asia Major, v. 19, n. 1/2 (2006): 13 -37
- Brose, Benjamin 2006, «Crossing Thousands of LI of Waves: the Return of China's Lost Tiantai Texts, Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies» , vol. 29, n. 1 (2006/2008): 21 -62
- Cai Jinghao 蔡鏡浩 (ed.) 1990, Weijin Nanbei chao ciyu lshii 魏晉南北朝詞語例釋, Jiangsu guji chubanshe, Nanjing
- Carré , Patrick (transl.) 2004, Introduction aux pratiques de la non-dualité , Commentaire du Soûtra de la Liberté inconcevable, Fayard, Paris ─── (transl.) 2013, Soutra de la Liberté Inconcevable -Les enseignements de Vimalakīrti, Fayard, Paris Chan, Alan 1991, Two Visions of the Way: A Study of the Wang Pi and the Ho-Shang Kung Commentaries on the Lao-Tzu, SUNY Press, New York
- Chen, Jinhua 2014, « Meditation Traditions in Fifth-Century Northern China: With a Special Note on a Forgotten "Kaśmīri" Meditation Tradition Brought to China by Buddhabhadra (359 - 429)» , in Tansen Sen (ed.), Buddhism Across Asia -Networks of Material, Intellectual and Cultural Exchange, Volume 1, ISEAS Publishing, Singapore, pp. 101 -129 Ch'en, Kenneth 1960, «Some Problems in the Translation of the Chinese Buddhist Canon», Tsing-hua Journal of Chinese Studies, vol. 2, n. 1 (1960): 178 -188 ─── 1964, Buddhism in China, A Historical Survey, Princeton University Press, Princeton
- Chen Yinque 陳寅恪 2001 (a), «Zhi Mindu xueshuo kao» 支敏度學說考, Chen Yinke ji - Jinmingguan conggao chubian 陳寅恪集 -金明館叢稿初編, Sanlian shudian, Beijing, pp. 159 - 187 ─── 2001 (b), Dushu zhaji san ji 讀書札記三集, Sanlian shudian, Beijing ─── 2011, Chen Yinque Wei Jin Nanbenchao shi jiangyan lu 陳寅恪魏晉南北朝史講演錄, Guizhou renmin chubanshe, Guiyang
- Cheng, Franç ois 2000, Vide et Plein. Le langage pictural Chinois, Seuil, Paris Cheng Xiangqing 程湘清 (ed.) 1992, Wei Jin Nanbeichao hanyu yanjiu 魏晉南北朝漢語研究, Shandong jiaoyu chubanshe, Jinan
- Cheung, Martha P. Y. 2014, An anthology of Chinese Discourse on Translation -Volume One: From Earliest Times to the Buddhist Project, Routledge, London and New York Chi Limei 池麗梅 2001, «Tonkō shahon Yuimakitsukōge» 敦煌写本『維摩詰経解』, in Indogaku Bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究 50.1 (December, 2001), pp. 294 -292
- Chou, Po-kan 2004, « The Problem of the Authorship of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa: a Re- examination» , Taida lishi xuebao 臺大歷史學報, n. 34 (2004), pp. 281 -327
- Collins, Steven 1993, «The Discourse on What is Primary (Aggañña-sutta): an Annotated Translation» , in Journal of Indian Philosophy, vol. 21, n. 4 (1993), pp. 301 -393
- Cui Feng 崔峰 2013, Ruchuan, duihua yu chongtu -Cong Jiumoluoshi ru Hua chuanjiao kan Yindu Fojiaoxiang Zhongguo de shuru 入傳、對話與衝突 -從鳩摩羅什入華傳教看印度佛教 向中國的輸入, Ph. D. Thesis, North-West University 西北大學, Xi'an Dai Junren 戴君仁 1970, « Jingshu de yancheng» 經疏的衍成 in Kong Meng xuebao 孔孟學報, n. 19 (1970): 77 -96
- ─── 1974, « Huang Kan Lunyu jijie yishu de xingzhi he xingshi» 皇侃論語集解義疏的性質和 形式, in DAI Junren, Meiyuan lunxue xuji 梅園論學續集, Yiwen yinshuguan, Taipei, pp. 118 - 128
- Dai Liqin 戴麗琴 2010, Shishuo xinyu yu Fojiao《世說新語》與佛教， Master's thesis, Huazhong Normal University 華中師範大學 Daitō Shuppansha 1965, Japanese-English Buddhist Dictionary 日英佛教辭典, Tokyo
- Declerque, Dominik 1998, Writing against the State, E. J. Brill, Leiden Demié ville, Paul 1973, Choix d'Étude Bouddhiques, E. J. Brill, Leiden ─── 1985, Buddhism and Healing -Demiéville's Article "Byō" from Hōbōgirin (trasl. by Mark Tatz), University Press of America, Lanham -New York -London ─── 1986, « Philosophy and Religion from Han to Sui» , in John K. Fairbank and Denis Twitchett (eds.) Cambridge History Of China, 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 808 -878
- ─── 1987, « Vimalakīrti en Chine» , in Étienne Lamotte 1987, L'Enseignement de Vimalakīrti, Appendix II (pp. 438 -455)
- Dong Zhiqiao 董志翹 and Cai Jinghao 蔡鏡浩 1994, Zhonggu xuci yufa shili 中古虛詞語法釋 例, Jilin jiaoyu chubanshe, Changchun Dong Zhiqiao 董志翹 and Wang Dong 王東 2002, « Zhonggu hanyu yufa yanjiu gaishu» 中古漢 語語法研究概述, Journal of School of Chinese Language and Culture -Nanjing Normal University 南京師範大學文學院學報 (2002, n. 2): 148 -162
- Du Chenghui 杜成輝 2015, « Song dai Yinjingyuan kao» 宋代印經院考, Zhongguo shi yanjiu 中國史研究, n. 97 (2015): 117 -138
- Fang Guangchang 方廣錩 and Xu Peiling 許培鈴 1994, « Dunhuang yishu zhong de Weimojie suoshuo jing ji qi zhushu» 敦煌遺書中的《維摩詰所說經》及其注疏, in Dunhuang Yanjiu 敦 煌研究 4 (1994): 145 -151 ─── 2004, Dao'an pingzhuan 道安評傳, Kunlun chubanshe, Beijing ─── 2015 (Transl. by Xin Zi and Jiang Wu) « Defining the Chinese Buddhist Canon: Its Origin, Periodization, and Future», Journal of Chinese Buddhist Studies 28 (2015): 1 -34
- Fang Yixin 方一新 and Wang Yunlu 王雲路 1993, Zhonggu hanyu duben 中古漢語讀本, Jilin jiaoyu chubanshe, Changchun Fanjiang Guanhong 范姜冠閎 2015, Guangzhai Fayun «Fahua jing yiji» yanjiu 光宅法雲《法 華經義記》研究, Master's Thesis, National Chengchi University 國立政治大學
- Felbur, Rafal (translator) 2017, Essays of Sengzhao, in Three Short Treatises by Vasubandhu, Sengzhao and Zongmi, published by BDK America Inc., Moraga (California), pp. 49 -135.
- Funayama, Tōru 2006, «Masquerading as Translations: Examples of Chinese Lectures by Indian Scholar-monks in the Six Dynasties Period» , Asia Major, Third Series, vol. XIX, parts 1-2 (2006): 39 -55.
- ─── 2008, « The work of Paramārtha: An example of Sino-Indian crosscultural exchange» , Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, vol. 31, n. 1-2, 2008 (20010): 141 - 184
- Gethin, Rupert 1992, « The Mātikās: Memorization, Mindfulness, and the List» , in Janet Gyatso (ed.), In the Mirror of Memory -Reflections on Mindfulness and Remembrance in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism, SUNY Press, Albany, 1992, pp. 149 -172
- Guan Shiqian 關世謙 2003, « Sui Yangdi yu fojiao» 隋煬帝與佛教, Yuanguang foxue xuebao 圓 光佛學學報, n. 8 (2003): 205 -224
- Guo Zhaoshun 郭朝順 2016, «Luoshi yi Weimojie jing quanshi chuantong de xingcheng ji qi wenti» 羅什譯《維摩經》詮釋傳統的形成及其問題, in Foguang xuebao 佛光學報, new vol. 2, n. 1, (2016): 35 -96
- ─── 2017, « Weimojie jing de zongpai quanshi chayi: yi Luoshi yiben wei hexin de Sui-Tang Fojiao zongpai quanshi de kaizhan»《維摩詰經》的宗派詮釋差異：以羅什譯本為核心的隨 唐佛教宗派詮釋的開展, Foguang xuebao 佛光學報, new vol. 3, n.2, (2017): 41 -108
- ─── 2018, «Kuiji Shuo wugoucheng jing shu de jiejing fangfa yu Luoshi ben quanshi chuantong de chongtu yu rongshe» 窺基《說無垢稱經疏》的解經方法與羅什本詮釋傳統的衝突與融攝, Foguang xuebao 佛光學報, new vol. 4, n. 1 (2018): 183 -235
- Hamlin, Edward 1988, «Magical Upāya in the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa-sūtra» , in Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 11/1 (1988): 89 -121
- Harrison, Paul 1992, «Is the Dharma-kāya the Real "Phantom Body" of the Buddha?» , Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, vol. 15, n. 1 (1992), pp. 44 -94 ─── 2000, « Mañjuśrī and the Cult of the Celestial Bodhisattvas» , Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal 中華佛學學報, n. 13 (2000): 157 -193
- Hashimoto Hidemi 橋本秀美 (Chinese name: Qiao Xiuyan 喬 秀 岩 ) 2013 (a), Yishu xue shuaiwang shi lun 義疏學衰亡史論, Wangjuan lou, Taibei ─── 2013 (b), Beijing du jing shuo ji 北京讀經說記, Wanjuan lou, Taibei He Jianping 何劍平 2009, Zhongguo zhonggu Weimojie xinyang yanjiu 中國中古維摩詰信仰研 究, Sichuan chuban jituan, Chengdu He Leshi 何樂士 (ed.) 2006, Gudai hanyu xuci cidian 古代漢語虛詞詞典, Yuwen chubanshe, Beijing
- Hirai Yūkei 平井宥慶 1983, « Tonkō bon Chū Yuimakitsukyō no genkei nitsuite» 敦煌本注維 摩詰經の原形について，in Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究, vol. 31n. 2 (1983): 327 -332
- Hirakawa Akira 1990 (tr. by Paul Groner), A History of Indian Buddhism from Śākyamuni to Early Mādhyamika, University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu ─── 1997, A Buddhist Chinese-Sanskrit Dictionary, The Reiyukai, Tokyo
- Huang Qijiang 黃啟江 1989, « Bei-Song Bianjing zhi siyuan yu fojiao» 北宋汴京之寺院與佛教, Journal of the National Institute for Compilation and Translation 國立編譯館館刊, vol. 18, n. 2 (1989): 101 -123
- ─── 1990, « Song dai de yi jing runwen guan yu fojiao» 宋代的譯經潤文官與佛教, Gugong xueshu jikan 故宮學術季刊 7:4 (1990): 13 -31
- ─── 1968, «Chih Tun's Notions of Prajñā», Journal of American Oriental Society, vol. 88, n. 2 (1968): 243 -266
- Hurvitz, Leon N. and Link, Arthur E. 1974, «Three Prajñāpāramitā Prefaces of Tao-An» , Mé langes de Sinologie offerts à Monsieur Paul Demié ville, vol. 2, Bibliothèque de l'Institut des Hautes Études Chinoises volume XX, Paris 1974: 403 -470
- Ji Qin 季琴 2004，Sanguo Zhi Qian yijing cihua yanjiu 三國支謙譯經詞彙研究, Ph. D. Thesis, Zhejiang University 浙江大學, Hangzhou
- Jiang Lihong 蔣禮鴻 1994 (ed.), Dunhuang wenxian yuyan cidian 敦煌文獻語言詞典, Hangzhou daxue chubanshe, Hangzhou ─── 1997, Dunhuang bianwen ziyi tongshi 敦煌變文字義通釋, Shanghai guji chubanshe, Shanghai ─── 2001, Jiang Lihong ji 蔣禮鴻, 6 vols., Zhejiang jiaoyu chubanshe, Hangzhou
- Jiang Longxiang 姜龍翔 2014, « Wujing Zhengyi shu bupo zhu zhi wenti zaitan» 《五經正義》 「疏不破注」之問題再探, Chengda zhongwen xuebao 成大中文學報, n. 46 (2014): 137 -184
- Kamata Shigeo 镰田茂雄 1986, Jianming Zhongguo fojiao shi 簡明中國佛教史, Shanghai yiwen chubanshe, Shanghai ─── 1994, «Jiumoluoshi dui Dongya Fojiaoshi de yingxiang» 鳩摩羅什對東亞佛教史的影響, Shijie zongjiao yanjiu 世界宗教研究, n. 2 (1994): 34-39
- Kanno Hiroshi 菅野博史 1986 (a), « Daihatsu Nehangyō shūge kiso teki kenkyū» 『大般涅槃 経集解』基礎的研究, in Tōyō Bunka 東洋文化 66 (1986): 93 -173
- « Daihatsu Nehangyō shūge ni okeru Sōryō no kyōhan shisō» 『大般涅槃経集解』 における僧亮の教判思想, in Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究, vol. 35, n. 1, (1986): 78 -81
- ─── 1988, « Daihatsu Nehangyō shūge ni okeru Sōshū no kyōhan shisō» 『大般涅槃経集解』 における僧宗の教判思想, in Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究, vol. 37, n. 1 (1986): 87 -91
- ─── 2003, « Chinese Buddhist Sūtra Commentaries of the Early Period» , Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University for the Academic Year 2002, n. 6, pp. 301 -320
- Kawano Kimiko 河野貴美子 2012, « Nailiang siyuan shequ hanwen dianji xiao kao 奈良寺院攝 取漢文典籍小考» , in Wang Yong 王勇 (ed.) 2012, Dongya zuobiao zhong de shuji zhi lu yanjiu 東亞坐標中的書籍之路研究, Zhongguo shuji chubanshe, Beijing
- Kimura Senshō 木村 宣彰 1986, «Chū Yuimakyō no ihon nitsuite» 注維摩経の異本について, in Shinshyū Sōgō Kenkyūshyo Kyō 真宗総合研究所研究所紀要 (Annual Memoirs of the Ōtani University Shin Buddhist Comprehensive Research Institute), n. 4 (1986): 1 -17 ─── 1987, «Chū Yuimakyō shoin no beppon nitsuite» 注維摩経所引の別本について, in Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究, vol. 35, n. 2 (1987): 99 -104
- Kogachi Ryūichi 古勝 隆一 2001 (a), «Kōkan Gi Shin chūshakusho no jobun» 後漢魏晋注釈書 の序文 Prefaces to Commentaries during the Later Han, Wei and Jin Periods), Higashikata gakuhō 東方學報, vol. 73 (2011): 1 -48.
- ─── 2001 (b) « Sekitenrei to Gisogaku» 釈奠礼と義疏学, in Ichirō Kominami 小南一郎 (ed.), Chūgoku no reisei to reigaku 中國の禮制と禮學, Kyoto, Hōyū Shoten, pp. 469 -504
- Kudō Masaya 工藤雅也 2000 (a), «Chū Yuima Dōshōchū ni okeru kyōten chūshakuhō»『注維 摩』道生注における経典注釈法, in Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究, vol. 48, n. 2 (2000): 71 -73 ─── 2000 (b), «Chū Yuima ni okeru chūshaku keishiki no mondai nitsuite»『注維摩』におけ る注釈形式の問題について, in Tendai Gakuhō 天台學報 42 (2000): 150 -154
- Lai, Whalen 1983, « Before the Prajñā Schools: The Earliest Chinese Commentary on the Aṣṭasāhasrikā», The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, vol. 6, n. 1 (1983): 91 -108
- Lamotte, Étienne 1944 -1980, Le Traité de la Grande Vertu de Sagesse de Nagarjuna, Tome I- V, Louvain ─── 1958, Histoire du Bouddhisme Indien des origins à l'ère Śaka, Bibliotheque du Musé on, Louvain ─── 1960, « Mañjuśrī» , in T'oung Pao, Second Series, vol. 48, Livr. 1/3 (1960): 1 -96 ─── 1987, L'Einsegnement de Vimalakīrti, Publications de l'Institute Orientaliste de Louvain, Louvain Lan Jifu 藍吉富 1993, Sui dai fojiao shi shulun 隋代佛教史述論, Taiwan Shangwu Yinshuguan, Taibei
- Lancaster, Lewis R. 1975, « The Oldest Mahāyāna Sūtra: its Significance for the Study of Buddhist Development» , The Eastern Buddhist, NEW SERIES, Vol. 8, No. 1 (May, 1975), pp. 30 -41
- Legittimo, Elsa 2014, «The First Āgama Transmission to China» , in Tansen Sen (ed.), Buddhism Across Asia -Networks of Material, Intellectual and Cultural Exchange, Volume 1, ISEAS Publishing, Singapore, pp. 65 -83
- Lewis, Mark Edward 1999, Writing and Authority in Early China, SUNY Press, Albany ─── 2009, China Between Empires: The Northern and Southern Dynasties, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge-Massachusetts and London-England
- Li Fuhua 李富華 2003, «Kaibao zang yanjiu» 《開寶藏》研究, Pumen xuebao 普門學報 n. 13 (2003): 1 -16
- Li Ming 黎明 1996, « Jingming jing jijie Guanzhong shu (pt. 1)» 淨名經集解關中疏, in Fang Guangchang 方廣锠 (ed.), Zang wai fojiao wenxian 臧外佛教文獻, n. 2 (1996): 175 -292
- ─── 1997, «Jingming jing jijie Guanzhong shu (pt. 2)» 淨 名 經 集 解 關 中 疏 , in Fang Guangchang 方廣锠 (ed.) 1997, Zang wai fojiao wenxian 臧外佛教文獻, n. 3 (1997): 70 -214
- Li Xiaorong 李小榮 2015, « Tang dai yichang yu wenshi: canyu yu yingxiang» 唐代譯場與文士： 參預與影響, Wenxue yichan 文學遺產 (Literary Heritage) 2015, n. 2, pp. 94 -105
- Liang Qichao 梁啟超 1999, Fanyi wenxue yu fodian 翻譯文學與佛典, Liang Qichao quanji 梁 啟超全集, vol. 13 (1920 -1924), Beijing chubanshe, Beijing
- «Chinese Buddhism during the Fourth and Fifth Centuries», in Monumenta Nipponica, Vol. 11, No. 1 (1955): 44 -83
- ─── 1956, «The World Conception of Chu Tao Sheng» , in Monumenta Nipponica, Vol. 12, No. 3/4 (Oct., 1956 -Jan., 1957): 241 -268
- ─── 1968, The Book of Chao, Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong Link, Arthur E. 1957, « Shyh Daw-An's Preface to Saṅgharakṣa's Yogācārabhūmi-Sūtra and the Problem of Buddho-Taoist Terminology in Early Chinese Buddhism», in Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 77, No. 1 (Jan. -Mar., 1957): 1 -14 ─── 1958, « Biography of Shih Tao-an» , in T'oung Pao, Second Series, Vol. 46, Livr. 1/2 (1958): 1 -48 ─── 1969, « The Taoist Antecedents of Tao-an's Prajñā Ontology» , in History of Religions, Vol. 9, No. 2/3 (Nov., 1969 -Feb., 1970): 181 -215 ─── 1976, « Evidence for Doctrinal Continuity of Han Buddhism from the Second through the Fourth Centuries. The Prefaces of An Shihkao's Grand Sūtra on Mindfulness of the Respiration and K'ang Senghui's Introduction to the 'Perfection of Dhyāna'», in James B. Parsons (ed.), Papers in Honor of Professor Woodbridge Bingham. A Festschrift for his Seventy-fifth Birthday, Chinese Materials Center, San Francisco, 1976, pp. 55 -126 · DOI
- Liu Guijie 劉貴杰 1990, «Sengrui sixiang yanjiu» 僧叡思想研究, Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal 中華佛學學報, No. 3, (1990): 237 -260
- Liu Jian 劉堅 (ed.), Jindai hanyu duben 近代漢語讀本, Shanghai jiaoyu chubanshe, Shanghai
- Liu Jian 劉堅 and Jiang Lansheng 江藍生 (ed.), Tang wudai yuyan cidian 唐五代語言詞典, Shanghai jiaoyu chubanshe, Shanghai
- Lo, Yuet Keung 2002, «Persuasion and Entertainment at Once: Kumārajīva's Buddhist Storytelling in His Commentary on the Vimalakīrti-sūtra» , Zhongguo wen zhe yanjiu jikan, n. 21 (2002): 89 -116
- Lu Xun 魯迅 1927, Weijin fengdu ji wenzhang yu yao ji jiu zhi guanxi 魏晉風度及文章與藥及 酒之關係, in LU Xun 1928, Eryi ji 而已集, Shanghai Beixin shuju, Shanghai, pp. 115 -152
- Luo Shaoping 羅少萍 1994, Zhiyi Weimojie jing jieshi zhi yanjiu 智顗《維摩詰經》解釋之研 究, Master's Thesis, Chung-Hwa Institute of Buddhist Studies 中華佛學研究所
- Luo Zhenyu 羅振玉 1937, « Dunhuang Yaoqin xieben Sengzhao Weimojiejing jie canjuan jiaoji» 敦煌姚秦寫本僧肇維摩詰經解殘卷校記, in Luo Jizu 羅繼祖 and Wang Tongce 王同策 (eds.) 2010, Luo Zhenyu Xueshu lunzhu ji 羅振玉學術論著集 (16 vols.), Shanghai guji chubanshe, Shanghai, vol. 4, pp. 385 -440
- Mair, Victor (ed.) 1983, Experimental Essays on the Chuang-tzu, University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu ─── 1984, « What is Pien-wen?» , Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 44, No. 2 (1984): 493 -514
- ─── 2010, « What is Geyi, after all?» , in Alan K. L. Chan and Yuet-Keung Lo (eds.), Philosophy and Religion in Early Medieval China, pp. 227 -264
- ─── 2002, Shih-shuo Hsin-yu: A New Account of Tales of the World. By Liu I-ch'ing. With commentary by Liu Chün, 2 nd edition, Center for Chinese Studies, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
- Matsumori Hideyuki 松森秀幸 2015, «Shishōji Dōeki ni yoru Tendai bunken no eyō nitsuite» 資聖寺道液による天台文献の依用について, in Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學 研究, vol. 64 n.1, (2015): 509 -514
- May, Jacques1967, «Chōja 長者» , in Paul Demié ville (directeur), Jacques May (ré dacteur en chef), Hōbōgirin -quatriè me fascicule, Paris -Tokyo 1967, pp. 347 -353
- Mou Runsun 牟潤孫 1984, «Lun Ru Shi liang jia zhi jiang jing yu yishu» 論儒佛兩家之講經與 義疏, in Xiandai Foxue Daxi 現在佛學大系 26, Mile chubanshe, Taipei, pp. 1 -63 ─── 1987, «Lun Wei-Jin yilai zhi chongshang tanbian ji qi yingxiang» 論魏晉以來之崇尚談辯 及其影響, in Zhushi zhai conggao 注史齋叢稿, Beijing, Zhonghua shuju, 1987, pp. 303 -355
- Nagao, Gadjin 1973, « On the Theory of Buddha-Body» , in Eastern Buddhism, New Series, vol. 6, n. 1 (1973), pp. 25 -53
- Nakamura, Hajime 中村元 1957, « The Influence of Confucian Ethics on the Chinese Translation of Buddhist sūtras», in Kshitis Roy (ed.), Sino-Indian Studies -Liebenthal Festschrift, Santiniketan Press, Santiniketan (West Bengal, India), pp. 156 -170 ─── 1984, Zhongguo fojiao fazhan shi 中國佛教發展史 (3 voll.), Tianhua chuban, Taibei
- Nakano Tatsue 中野達慧 et al. (ed.) 1914 -1919, Nihon Daizōkyō 日本大藏經 (51 voll.), Hensankai, Tōkyō
- Nattier, Jan 2000, « The Teaching of Vimalakīrti (Vimalakīrtinirdeśa): A Review of Four English Translations» , in Buddhist Literature, n. 2: 234 -258 ─── 2004, «Beyond Translation and Transliteration: A New Look at Chinese Buddhist Terms», unpublished paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Western Branch of the American Oriental Society, Portland (October 16, 2004), 10.
- Nishino, Midori 2016, «The Legacy of É. Lamotte for the Study of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa» , in Foguang xuebao 佛光學報, New vol. 2, 1 (2016): 265 -290
- Nylan, Michael 2001, The Five "Confucian" Classics, Yale University Press, New Haven and London Ōchō Einichi 橫超慧日 1942, « Soei to Eiei wa donin nari» 僧叡と慧叡は同人なり [Where Sengrui and Huirui the Same Person?], Tōhō gakuhō 東方學報 13, n. 2 (1942): 1 -29 ─── 1958, Chūgoku Bukkyō no Kenkyū 中國佛敎の研究, vol. 1, Hōzokan, Kyoto ─── 1979, «Shakkyōshikō» 釈経史考 (=Investigation into the History of Sūtra Exegesis), in Chūgoku Bukkyō no Kenkyū 中國佛敎の研究, vol. 3, Hōzokan, Kyoto, pp. 165 -206 First published in Shina Bukkyō Shigaku 支那仏教史学 (The Journal of the History of Chinese Buddhism) 1,1, April (1937): 75 -110
- ─── 1982, Rajū 羅什, Shohan, Tokyo ─── 2002, (Chinese translation by QIU Minjie 邱敏捷) « Neipan wuming lun ji qi beijing» 〈涅 槃無名論〉及其背景, Zhengguang zazhi 正觀雜誌, n. 23 (2002): 167 -225
- Okayama Hajime 丘山新 1977, «Chū Yuimakitsukyō shoin no beppon nitsuite» 『注維摩詰経』 所引の「別本」について, in Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究, vol. 26, n. 1 (1977): 154 -155
- Pelliot, Paul 2000, « Notes sur Kumārajīva» , in A Life Journey to the East. Sinological Studies in Memory of Giuliano Bertuccioli (1923 -2001), Antonino Forte and Federico Masi (eds.), Scuola Italiana di Studi sull'Asia Orientale, Kyoto, pp. 1 -19
- Plassen, Joerg 2005, « Sŭng Tonang (僧 道朗) (a.k.a. Sŭngnang (僧朗), fl. 476? -512) from Koguryŏ and his Role in Chinese San-lun» , International Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture, Vol. 5 (February 2005): 165 -198 (this article is a revised version of a paper presented at the First World Congress of Korean Studies, Academy of Korean Studies, Sŏngnam, July 18- 20, 2002)
- Qiu Minjie 邱敏捷, « Zongbenyi yu Neipan wuming lun de zuozhe wenti» <宗本義> 與 <涅槃 無名論> 的作者問題, Guoli Taiwan daxue wenxueyuan Foxue yanjiu zhongxin xuebao 國立台 灣大學文學院佛學研究中心學報 8 (2003): 43 -72
- Radich, Michael D. 2007 (a), « Problems and Opportunities in the Study of the Buddha's Bodies» (Review Article), in New Zealand Journal of Asian Studies 9, 1 (June, 2007): 162-85
- The Somatics of Liberation: Ideas about Embodiment in Buddhism from Its Origins to the Fifth Century C.E., Ph. D. Thesis, Harvard University, Department of East Asian Languages and Civilizations
- Ren Jiyu 任繼愈 (ed.) 1981, Zhongguo Fojiao shi 中國佛教史, vol. 1, Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, Beijing
- ─── (ed.) 1985, Zhongguo Fojiao shi 中國佛教史, vol. 2, Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, Beijing
- Rigopoulos, Antonio 1992, « The Avyākatāni and the Catuṣkoṭi Form in the Pāli Sutta Piṭaka I» , in East and West 42 (1992), pp. 227 -259
- ─── 1993, « The Avyākatāni and the Catuṣkoṭi Form in the Pāli Sutta Piṭaka II» , in East and West 43 (1993), pp.115 -140
- Robinson, Richard H. 1967, Early Mādhyamika in India and China, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison ─── 1957, «Some Logical Aspects of Nāgārjuna's System», in Philosophy East and West, 6, pp. 291 -308
- Rogers, Michael C. 1968, The Chronicle of Fu Chien: A Case of Exemplar History. Translated and Annotated with Prolegomena by ──, Berkeley and Los Angeles, University of Californa Press
- Seidel, Anna1983, « Daiji 大士» , in Paul Demié ville (directeur), Jacques May (ré dacteur en chef), Hōbōgirin -sesiè me fascicule, Paris -Tokyo 1967, pp. 670 -679
- Sharf, Robert H. 2002, Coming to terms with Chinese Buddhism: A Reading of the Treasure Store Treatise, University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu
- Shen, Haiyan 2011, «A Hermeneutic Approach to the Lotus Sūtra ── On Tiantai Zhiyi's Work, The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sūtra», Zhexue yu Wehua 哲學與文化, vol. 38, n. 12 (2011), pp. 35 -68
- Shi Guopu 釋果樸 1997, «Luoshi qian Weimo jing zhi liuxing yu wenxian zai tan» 羅什前《維 摩經》之流行與文獻再探, Zhengguan zazhi 正觀雜誌 1 (1997), pp. 84 -112 ─── 1998 ， Dunhuang xiejuan P3006 Zhi Qian ben Weimojie jing zhujie kao 敦煌寫卷 「P3006」 「支謙」本《維摩詰經》注解考, Fagu wenhua, Taibei Shi Jun 石峻 2006, « Du Huida Zhaolun shu shu suojian» 讀慧達「肇論疏」述所見, in Shi Jun wenji 石峻文集, Huaxia chubanshe, Beijing, pp. 63 -71
- Shih, Robert 1968, Biographies des Moines Éminents (Kao Seng Tchouan) de Houei-kiao, traduites et annoté es, Louvain-Leuven ─── 1980, «La préface du Ta tche che louen par Seng-jouei» , in Indianisme et Bouddhisme, mé lange offerts à Mgr. Étienne Lamotte, Louvain-la-Neuve, Louvain, pp. 313 -328
- Sun Changwu 孙昌武 1996, « Tang Chang'an fosi kao» 唐长安佛寺考, Tang Yanjiu 唐研究 (1996), n. 2, pp. 1 -49
- Sun Gang 孫剛 2014, « Xia Song nianpu jianbian» 夏竦年譜簡編, Guji zhengli yanjiu xuekan 古 籍整理研究學刊 (Journal of Ancient Books Collation and Studies), n. 5 (2014). pp. 56 -60
- Sun Kaidi 孫楷第 2009, « Tang dai sujiang guifan yu qi ben zhi ticai» 唐代俗講軌範與其本之 體裁, in Cangzhou ji 滄州集, Zhonghua shuju, Beijing, pp. 1 -43
- Swartz, Wendy et al. (eds.) 2014, Early Medieval China -A sourcebook, Columbia University Press, New York Taishō Daigaku Sōgō Bukkyō Kenkyūjo Chū Yuimakitsukyō Kenkyūkai 大正大学綜合仏教研 究所注維摩詰経研究会 2000, Taiyaku chū Yuimakitsukyō 対訳注維摩詰経 (2 vols.), Sankibō Busshorin, Tōkyō Taishō University, Study Group on Buddhist Sanskrit Literature 2004, Vimalakīrtinirdeśa: Transliterated Sanskrit Text Collated with Tibetan and Chinese Translations. Taishō University -Institute for Comprehensive Studies of Buddhism
- Tan Mei Ah 2017, « Monetary policy as key to state authority and income in Tang China» , Zhongguo wenhua yanjiusuo xuebao 中國文化研究所學報 (Journal of Chinese Studies) No. 64 (January 2017)
- Tang Yongtong 湯用彤, 1947 (translated by Walter Liebenthal), «Wang Bi's New Interpretation of the Yijing and Lunyu», in Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 10, No. 2 (1947): 124 - 161 ─── 1968, (trad.
- M. C. Rogers) « On Ko-Yi, the Earliest Method by Which Indian Buddhism and Chinese Thought Were Synthesized» , in William Ralph Inge (ed.) 1968, Radhakrishnan: Comparative Studies in Philosophy presented in honour of his sixtieth birthday, Allen & Unwin, London, pp. 276 -286 ─── 2000, Tang Yongtong quanji (7 vols.), Hebei renmin chubanshe, Shijiazhuang
- Tansen, Sen 2002, « The Revival and Failure of Buddhist Translations during the Song Dynasty» , T'oung Pao, Second Series, Vol. 88, Fasc. 1/3 (2002), pp. 27 -80
- Teiser, Stephen F. 2007, « Social History and the Confrontation of Cultures: Foreword to the Third Edition» , in Zürcher, Erik 2007, The Buddhist Conquest of China, E. J. Brill, Leiden, pp. XIII -XXXVII Thurman, Robert 2000 (1 st ed. 1976), The Holy Teaching of Vimalakīrti: A Mahāyāna Scripture, The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park Tokuno, Kyoko 1990, « The Evaluation of Indigenous Scriptures in Chinese Buddhist Bibliographical Catalogues» , in Buswell, Robert E. Jr. (ed.) 1990, Chinese Buddhist Apocrypha, University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu, pp. 31 -74
- Tsukamoto Zenryū 塚本善隆 (ed.) 1955, Jōron kenkyū 肇論研究, Hōzōkan, Kyōto ─── 1985, A History of Early Chinese Buddhism. From its Introduction to the Death of Hui- yüan (Translated by Leon Hurvitz), 2 vols., Kodansha International LTD, Tokyo.
- Tu, Ching-yi (ed.) 2005, Interpretation and Intellectual Change: Chinese Hermeneutics is Historical Perspective, Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, New Jersey Tu Yanqiu 涂艷秋 2000, « Jiumoluoshi menxia you kong dao you de zhuanbian -yi Sengrui wei daibiao» 鳩摩羅什門下由 「空」到 「有」的轉變 -以僧叡為代表, Hanxue yanjiu 漢學研 究, vol 18, n. 2 (2000): 113 -142 ─── 2005, «Jiumoluoshi yi jing fangfa de tantao -yi Zhu Weimojiejing wei li» 鳩摩羅什譯經 方法的探討 ─ 以《注維摩詰經》為例, Xuanzang renwen xuebao 玄奘人文學報, n. 4 (2005): 121 -156 ─── 2006, Jiumoluoshi bore sixiang zai Zhongguo 鳩摩羅什般若思想在中國, Liren shuju, Taibei ─── 2010，«Lun Dao'an cong geyi dao xunzhang chaju de zhuanbian» 論道安從格義到尋章 察句的轉變, Taida Zhongwen xuebao 台大中文學報, n. 32 (2010): 119 -166
- «Cong Zhiren dao Li -Lun Sengzhao yu Daosheng zhu Weimojie jing de zhuanbian» 從「至人」到「理」----論僧肇與道生注《維摩詰經》的轉變, paper presented at the international conference "Textual exegesis from a multi-cultural perspective" 多元文化經典 詮釋 (third edition) held at the Nanhua University 南華大學 of Taiwan on May 5-6, 2011 ─── 2013 «
- Cong Zhi Qian yu Zhu Fahu de yijing fengge lice Dunhuang xiejuan P.3006 jingwen zhi yizhe» 從支謙與竺法護的譯經風格釐測敦煌寫卷 P.3006 經文之譯者, Hanxue yanjiu 漢學研究, vol. 31, 1 (2013): 285 -318
- «Zaoqi zhongguo fojiao zhu jing fangfa yanjiu: yi di yi jieduan wei zhu» 早期中 國佛教注經方法研究：以第一階段為主 (paper presented at the second conference of the research program "The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa and East-Asian Culture" 維摩經與東亞文化 held at the Foguang University on October 4, 2015)
- ─── 2016, «Han yi Daban Niepan jing sikao fangshi yanjiu» 漢譯《大般涅槃經》思考方式研 究, Taida foxue yanjiu 台大佛學研究, n. 31 (2016): 1 -44
- Usuda Junzō 臼 田 淳 三 1977, «Chū Yuimakitsukyō no kenkyū» 注 維 摩 詰 経 の 研 究 , in Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度學佛教學研究, v. 26 n.1 (1977): 262 -265
- Van Ess, Hans 1994, «The Old Text/New Text Controversy: Has the 20th Century Got It Wrong?», T'oung Pao, Second Series, Vol. 80, Fasc. 1/3 (1994), pp. 146 -170
- Venuti, Lawrence 1995, The Translator's Invisibility: A History of Translation, Routledge, London and New York ─── 1998, The Scandals of Translation, Routledge, London and New York ─── 2001, «Strategies of Translation», in M. Baker (ed.) Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, Routledge, London and New York, pp. 240 -244
- Wagner, Rudolf G. 1969, Die Fragen Hui-Yuans and Kumārajīva, Ph. D. Dissertation, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich (Faculty of Philosophy) ─── 1971, « The Original Structure of the Correspondence between Shih Hui-Yüan and Kumārajīva» , Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 31 (1971), pp. 28-48
- ─── 1986, « Wang Bi: "The Structure of the Laozi's Pointers" ("Laozi weizhi lilüe"): A Philological Study and Translation» , T'oung Pao, Second Series, Vol. 72, Livr. 1/3 (1986): 92 - 129
- Wang Chongmin 王重民 and Liu Minshu 劉銘恕 (eds.) 1962, Dunhuang yishu zongmu suoyin 敦煌遺書總目索引, Beijing shangwu yinshuguan, Beijing
- Wang Jianjun 王建軍 2011, Zhu Weimojie suo shuo jing yanjiu《注維摩詰所說經》研究, Master's thesis, North-West University 西北大學
- Wang Xiang 2014, «From Nālānda to Chang'an: A Survey of Buddhist Libraries in Medieval China (618-907)» , in Tansen Sen (ed.), Buddhism Across Asia -Networks of Material, Intellectual and Cultural Exchange, Volume 1, ISEAS Publishing, Singapore, pp. 207 -231
- Wang Xiaoyi 王晓毅 1991, Zhongguo wenhua de qingliu -Zhengshi zhi yin 中國文化的清流 ──正始之音, Shehui kexue chubanshe, Shanghai ─── 1994, Zhongguo gudai rencai jianshishu -Renwu zhi yizhu yu yanjiu 中國古代人才鑒識 術 ──《人物誌》譯注與研究, Jilin wenshi chubanshe, Changchun ─── 1995, «Zhi Daolin shengping shiji kao» 支道林生平事蹟考, Zhonghua foxue xuebao 中華 佛學學報 (Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal), n. 8 (1995): 243 -271 ─── 1996, Wang Bi Pingzhuan 王弼評傳, Nanjing Daxue Chubanshe, Nanjing ─── 2003, Ru Shi Dao yu Wei Jin Xuanxue xingcheng 儒释道與魏晉玄學形成, Zhonghua shuju, Beijing ─── 2008, Zhiren zhe zhi -Renwuzhi jiedu 知人者智--<人物志>解讀 Zhonghua shuju, Beijing ─── 2011 (1 st ed. 2006), Guo Xiang pingzhuan 郭象評傳 (2 vols.), Nanjing daxue chubanshe, Nanjing
- Wang Xinshui 王新水 2006, Weimojie jing sixiang yaniu 《維摩詰經》思想研究, Ph. D. Thesis, Fudan University ─── 2009, Weimojie jing sixiang xin lun《維摩詰經》思想新論, Huangshan shushe, Hefei Wang Yarong 王亞榮 1999, « Riyan si kao -Jian lun Sui dai Nanfang fojiao yixue de beichuan» 日嚴寺考 ─ 兼論隋代南方佛教義學的北傳, Zhonghua foxue xuebao 中華佛學學報 (Chung- Hwa Buddhist Journal), n. 12 (1999): 191 -203
- Wang Yunlu 王雲路 2001, « Bainian zhonggu hanyu cihui yanjiu shulüe» 百年中古漢語詞彙研 究述略, Zhejiang daxue xuebao (Renwen shehui kexue ban) 浙江大學學報 (人文社會科學版) (Journal of Zhejiang University -Humanities and Social Sciences), vol. 31, n. 4 (2001): 55 -60
- Watson, Burton 1997, The Vimalakīrti Sūtra, Columbia University Press, New York ─── 2013, The Complete Works of Zhuangzi, Columbia University Press, New York
- Whitehead, Douglas James 1976, The Sinicization of Buddhism: A Study of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra and Its Interpetations in China from the Third Through the Sixth Century, Ph. D. Thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachussets
- Williams, Paul 2009, Mahāyāna Buddhism: the Doctrinal Foundations, Routledge, London and New York
- Wright, Arthur F. 1957, « Seng-hui alias Hui-jui: a Biographical Bisection in the Kai-Seng chuan» , in Kshitis Roy (ed.), Sino-Indian Studies -Liebenthal Festschrift, Santiniketan Press, Santiniketan (West Bengal, India), pp. 272 -294
- Wu Fangjia 吳芳佳 2013，Jian Hua-rong zhi mei -Shiliu guo "Tian Wang" minghao kaolun 兼華戎之美 ---十六國"天王"名號考論, Master's thesis, Nanjing University
- Wu Honglin 吳洪琳 2013, « Wang, Tianwang, Huangdi -Shiliu guo shiqi ge zhengquan shouling minghao yanjiu» , 王、天王、皇帝 ---十六國時期各政權首領名號研究, in Xibei minzu luncong 西北民族論叢 9, pp. 35 -53
- Wu, Yankang 2006, «Yang Renshan and the Jinling Buddhist Press» , The East Asian Library Journal 12, no. 2 (2006): 49 -98
- Xu Kangsheng 許抗生 1979, «Luelun Liang Jin Shiqi de Fojiao Zhexue Sixiang» 略論兩晉時期 的佛教哲學思想, in Zhongguo Zhexue 中國哲學 9, pp. 29 -60 ─── 1998, Sengzhao pingzhuan 僧肇評傳, Nanjing daxue chubanshe, Nanjing
- Xu Wenming 徐文明 2002 (a)，«Niepan wuming lun zhenwen bian»《涅槃無名論》真偽辨， 圓光佛學學報 Yuanguang Foxue xuebao, n. 7 (2002): 29 -48 ─── 2002 (b), «Sengrui de shengzu niandai yu sixiang» 僧叡的生卒年代與思想, Juequn xueshu lunwen ji 覺群學術論文集, vol. 2 http://www.guoxue.com/?p=1563 ─── 2003, « Sengrui Huirui fei yi ren bian» 僧叡慧叡非一人辯, Zhengguan zazhi 正觀雜誌, n. 25 (2003): 167 -180
- Yamamoto, Kosho (transl.) 1973, The Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra (from Dharmakshema's Chinese version, Taishō Tripitaka Vol. 12, No. 374), Karinbunko, Ube city (Japan)
- Yang, Lu 2004, « Narrative and Historicity in the Buddhist Biographies of Early Medieval China: The Case of Kumārajīva», in Asia Major Vol. 17, 2 (2004): 1 -43
- Yang, Zeng 2018, A biographical study on Bukong 不空 (aka Amoghavajra, 705 -774): Networks, Institutions and Identities, Doctoral thesis, The University of British Columbia (Vancouver)
- Young, Stuart H. 2015, Conceiving the Indian Buddhist Patriarchs in China, University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu
- Yu Jiaxi 余嘉锡 et al. (ed.) 1993, Shishuo xinyu jianshu 世 說 新 語 箋 疏 , Shanghai guji chubanshe, Shanghai
- Yu, Yingshi 余英時 1985, «Individualism and the Neo-Taoist Movement in Wei-Chin China» , in Munro, Donald (ed.), Individualism and Holism: Studies in Confucian and Taoist Values, Center for Chinese Studies, University of Michigan, Detroit, pp. 121 -155
- ─── 1987, « Han-Jin zhi ji shi zhi xin zijue yu xin sichao» 漢晉之際士之新自覺與新思潮, in Shi yu Zhongguo wenhua 士與中國文化, Shanghai renmin chubanshe, Shanghai, pp. 287 -400
- ─── 2000 (a cura di), Fazang -Trattato sul Leone d'Oro, Esedra, Padova ─── 2004, « Teaching Buddhism in Han China: A Study of the Ahan koujie shi'er yinyuan jing T1508 Attributed to An Shigao» , in Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University, vol. 7 (March 2004): 197 -224
- ─── 2005, In Praise of the Light: A Critical Synoptic Edition with an Annotated Translation of chapters 1-3 of Dharmarakṣa's Guang zan jing 光讃經, Being the Earliest Chinese Translation of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā., The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology, Soka University, Tokyo ─── 2007, «Inventing a New Idiom: Some Aspects of the Language of the Yin chi ru jing 陰持 入經 T 603 Translated by An Shigao», Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology at Soka University, vol. 10 (2007): 395 -416
- ─── 2008 (a), «A "new" early Chinese Buddhist commentary -The nature of the Da anban shouyi jing 大安般守意經 T 602 reconsidered» , Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, vol. 31, n. 1-2, 2008 (2010): 421 -484
- « The Nature of the Da anban shouyi jing 大安般守意經 T 602 reconsidered» (Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, vol. 31, n. 1-2 2008 (2010)
- ─── 2014, «A Unique Trajectory: Erik Zürcher's Studies of Chinese Buddhism» , Opening lecture at the conference "Chinese Buddhism and the Scholarship of Erik Zürcher", Leiden University, 12 February 2014
- ─── 2015, « Mind the Hermeneutical Gap: A Terminological Issue in Kumārajīva's version of the Diamond Sūtra» , in Xie Daning 謝大寧 (ed.) Hanchuan Fojiao yanjiu de guoqu, xianzai, weilai 漢傳佛教研究的過去現在未來, Yilan-Taiwan, pp. 157 -194
- Zeng Xiaohong 曾曉紅 2008, Dunhuang ben Weimojing zhushu xulu 敦煌本〈維摩經〉注疏敘 錄, Master's thesis, Shanghai Normal University
- Zhang Chunbo 張春波 (ed.) 2010, Zhaolun jiaoshi 肇論校釋, Zhunghua shuju, Beijing
- Zhang Huiming 張輝明 and Zhang Yihe 章義和 (ed.) 2016, Yanshi jiaxun yi zhu 顏氏家訓譯注, Shanghai guji chubanshe, Shanghai
- Zhang Jian 張劍 2004, «Chao shi shipu xu de faxian ji qi jiazhi» 《晁氏世譜序》的發現及其 價值, Huanan shifan daxue xuebao 華南師範大學學報 (Journal of South China Normal University) n. 6 (2005) ─── 2006, Song dai jiazu yu Wenxue -Yi Chanzhou Chao shi wei Zhongxin 宋代家族與文學 - 以澶州晁氏為中心, Beijing chubanshe, Beijing
- Zhang Wanqi 張萬起 (ed.) 1993, Shishuo xinyu cidian 世說新語詞典, Shangwu yinshuguan, Beijing Zhang Xuetao 張學濤 2011, « "Jijie" dingyi kaobian»"集解"定義考辨, Tangshan shifan xueyuan xuebao 唐山師範學院學報 (Journal of Tangshan Teachers College), Vol. 33, N. 4 (2011), pp. 4 -7
- Zhao Wen 趙文 2018, The Conceptions of Seeing the Buddha and Buddha Embodiments in Early Prajñāpāramitā Literature, Ph. D. Thesis, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich Zheng Acai 鄭阿財 2016 (a), « Cong danzhu dao hezhu: zhonggu Sichou zhi lu shang Zhu Weimojie jing xieben yanjiu» 從單注到合注：中古絲綢之路上《注維摩詰經》寫本研究, Tang yanjiu 唐研究, n. 22 (2016): 1 -25 ─── 2016 (b)
- « Xingyu Shuwu Dunhuang miji suo jian Weimojie jing ji qi xiangguan wenxian» 杏雨書屋《敦煌秘笈》所見《維摩詰經》及其相關文獻, Foguang xuebao 佛光學報, new vol. 2, n. 1 (2016): 1 -34 ─── 2017, Dunhuang xieben « Weimo yiji» chaoxie niandai ji xitong fenxi 敦煌寫本《維摩義 記》抄寫年代及系統分析, Foguang xuebao 佛光學報, new vol. 3, n. 2 (2017): 1 -40 ─── 2018, «Danzhu dao jizhu: cong Dunhuang Tulufan xieben yicun kan Sengzhao Weimojie jing de liuchuan» 單注到集注：從敦煌吐魯番寫本遺存看僧肇《注維摩詰經》的流傳 , Foguang xuebao 佛光學報, new vol. 4, n. 1 (2018): 99 -139
- Zhou Bokan 周伯戡 2004, « The Problem of the Authorship of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa: A Re-examination» , Taida lishi xuebao 台大歷史學報, n. 34 (2004): 281 -327
- Zhou Shujia 周叔迦 2004, Zhou Shujia foxue lunzhu ji 周叔迦佛學論著集 (2 vols.), Zhonghua shuju, Beijing ─── 2006，Zhongguo fojiao shi 中國佛教史, in Zhou Shujia foxue lunzhu quanji 周叔迦佛學 論著全集, vol. 1
- Zhu Qingzhi 朱慶之 1992, Fodian yu zhonggu hanyu cihui yanjiu 佛典與中古漢語詞匯研究, Wenjin chubanshe, Taibei ─── 2010, « On some basic features of Buddhist Chinese» , Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, vol. 31, n. 1-2, 2008 (2010): 485 -504
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Assandri, F. (2024) · Religions · doi:10.3390/rel15030256
“…of the concept of “traces” aligns with Buddhist interpretations, like those of Sengzhao 僧肇 (ca. 384–414) ( Zhu Weimojie jing, T 1775, 1, p. 327b; cf. Baggio 2019, p. 122) or Tiantai Zhiyi 天台智顗 (538–592) ( Miao fahua jing xuanyi T 1716, 7, p. 764c), rather than with the well‑known xuanxue…”
BackgroundResultInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- Baggio, G.
- Corresponding author
- Baggio, Giacomo
- Venue
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology)
- Publisher
- University of Groningen Press
- Published
- 2019-09-19
- OpenAlex
- W2971551375
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1
- Type
- dissertation
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Indian and Buddhist Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Chinese history and philosophy
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Classical Studies and Philology
- Keywords
- Sengzhao, Dao'an, Chinese Buddhist exegesis, textual research, Chinese translation of Buddhist texts, Chinese Buddhism, Buddhist sutra commentary, Chang'an
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary [T1775] by Sengzhao et alii and the Chinese Conquest of Buddhism. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.33612/diss.94589377
- The paper
- Baggio, G. (2019). The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Commentary [T1775] by Sengzhao et alii and the Chinese Conquest of Buddhism. University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology). https://doi.org/10.33612/diss.94589377
