Source: Wagner 1971

Wagner, Rudolf G. “The Original Structure of the Correspondence between Shih Hui-Yüan and Kumārajīva.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 31 (1971): 28-48.

Assertions

Assertion Argument Place in source Search

Wagner argues that the Dasheng dayi zhang 大乘大義章 T1856 (also known as the Jiumoluoshi fashi dayi 鳩摩羅什法師大義) was scrambled in transmission, and attempts, on the basis of close philological scrutiny of the text, to reconstruct the original order in which Huiyuan's questions and Kumārajīva's answers were produced and would have been presented. Essentially, Wagner argues as follows. Given the probable dating of the exchange (in Wagner´s view, approx. spring 406 to the end of 407), and the logistical realities of postal exchange at the time, Wagner contends that there would not have been sufficient time for an exchange of eighteen or twenty-eight questions and answers to have been delivered to and fro between Lushan and Chang'an, as the present structure of the text would make it appear. On the basis of rigorous formal criteria for determining the relative sequence of questions and answers (1971: 43), Wagner concludes that there were in fact only two exchanges of a total of four letters, each containing multiple questions (from Huiyuan) or answers thereto (from Kumārajīva). "I hope to have established that there were two letters with questions by Hui-yüan and two letters with answers by Kumārajīva, and that Hui-yüan knew only the answers to his first series of questions when he formulated the second series."

Edit

Wagner (1969): 6-11, 28-37; reprised in English in Wagner (1971).

 Wagner argues that the Dasheng dayi zhang 大乘大義章 T1856 (also known as the Jiumoluoshi fashi dayi 鳩摩羅什法師大義) was scrambled in transmission, and attempts, on the basis of close philological scrutiny of the text, to reconstruct the original order in which Huiyuan's questions and Kumarajiva's answers were produced and would have been presented. Essentially, Wagner argues as follows. Given the probable dating of the exchange (in Wagner s view, approx. spring 406 to the end of 407), and the logistical realities of postal exchange at the time, Wagner contends that there would not have been sufficient time for an exchange of eighteen or twenty-eight questions and answers to have been delivered to and fro between Lushan and Chang'an, as the present structure of the text would make it appear. On the basis of rigorous formal criteria for determining the relative sequence of questions and answers (1971: 43), Wagner concludes that there were in fact only two exchanges of a total of four letters, each containing multiple questions (from Huiyuan) or answers thereto (from Kumarajiva). "I hope to have established that there were two letters with questions by Hui-yuan and two letters with answers by Kumarajiva, and that Hui-yuan knew only the answers to his first series of questions when he formulated the second series." T1856; Dasheng dayi zhang 大乘大義章; 鳩摩羅什法師大義