Source: Lin and Radich 2020

Lin Qian 林乾 and He Shuqun 何书群 [Michael Radich]. "Zhu Fonian suo 'yi' dasheng jingdian de jisuanji fuzhu wenben fenxi yanjiu" 竺佛念所"译"大乘经典的计算机辅助文本分析研究. Shijie zongjiao wenhua 世界宗教文化 (2020), no. 6: 16-22.

Assertions

Assertion	Argument	Place in source	Search
Texts: T0309; 最勝問菩薩十住除垢斷結經 ; T0384; 菩薩從兜術天降神母胎說廣普經 ; T0385; 中陰經 ; T0656; 菩薩瓔珞經	Using computer-assisted analysis of internal evidence betraying intertextual relations, Lin and Radich follow up Nattier's (2010) discovery that T309 is a Chinese composition. They discover further Chinese sources for T309, and Chinese sources for T656. They corroborate Nattier's suggestion that these texts, even though they are Chinese compositions, are in fact by Zhu Fonian (they are stylistically consistent with his genuine translation works). They also analyse patterns in the ways that Zhu Fonian used his sources, and the uneven distribution of passages with obvious Chinese sources within these large texts (the distribution in the case of T656 being particularly uneven). Lin and Radich also consider the possibility that T384 and T385, two other Mahāyāna scriptures by Zhu Fonian and possibly connected with a similar episode in his life, may also be his own compositions. They are unable to find passages with direct Chinese sources in T384 and T385, but nevertheless, discuss certain other aspects of the content of the texts which do suggest that they are broadly texts of the same type as T309 and T656. They conclude that it is most likely that all four texts were composed in China by Zhu Fonian himself. Edit		Using computer-assisted analysis of internal evidence betraying intertextual relations, Lin and Radich follow up Nattier's (2010) discovery that T309 is a Chinese composition. They discover further Chinese sources for T309, and Chinese sources for T656. They corroborate Nattier's suggestion that these texts, even though they are Chinese compositions, are in fact by Zhu Fonian (they are stylistically consistent with his genuine translation works). They also analyse patterns in the ways that Zhu Fonian used his sources, and the uneven distribution of passages with obvious Chinese sources within these large texts (the distribution in the case of T656 being particularly uneven). Lin and Radich also consider the possibility that T384 and T385, two other Mahayana scriptures by Zhu Fonian and possibly connected with a similar episode in his life, may also be his own compositions. They are unable to find passages with direct Chinese sources in T384 and T385, but nevertheless, discuss certain other aspects of the content of the texts which do suggest that they are broadly texts of the same type as T309 and T656. They conclude that it is most likely that all four texts were composed in China by Zhu Fonian himself. T0309; 最勝問菩薩十住除垢斷結經 T0384; 菩薩從兜術天降神母胎說廣普經 T0385; 中陰經 T0656; 菩薩瓔珞經

Assertion

Argument

Place in source

Texts: T0309; 最勝問菩薩十住除垢斷結經 ; T0384; 菩薩從兜術天降神母胎說廣普經 ; T0385; 中陰經 ; T0656; 菩薩瓔珞經

Using computer-assisted analysis of internal evidence betraying intertextual relations, Lin and Radich follow up Nattier's (2010) discovery that T309 is a Chinese composition. They discover further Chinese sources for T309, and Chinese sources for T656. They corroborate Nattier's suggestion that these texts, even though they are Chinese compositions, are in fact by Zhu Fonian (they are stylistically consistent with his genuine translation works). They also analyse patterns in the ways that Zhu Fonian used his sources, and the uneven distribution of passages with obvious Chinese sources within these large texts (the distribution in the case of T656 being particularly uneven). Lin and Radich also consider the possibility that T384 and T385, two other Mahāyāna scriptures by Zhu Fonian and possibly connected with a similar episode in his life, may also be his own compositions. They are unable to find passages with direct Chinese sources in T384 and T385, but nevertheless, discuss certain other aspects of the content of the texts which do suggest that they are broadly texts of the same type as T309 and T656. They conclude that it is most likely that all four texts were composed in China by Zhu Fonian himself.

Edit