Source: Lin Jia'an 2009

Lin Jia’an 林家安. “Xiancun Han yi Zengyi ahan jing zhi yizhe kao 現存漢譯增一阿含經之譯者考.” MA Thesis, Taiwan: Yuan Kuang Institute of Buddhist Studies 圓光佛學研究所, 2009.

Assertions

Assertion Argument Place in source Search

Lin Jia'an argues that Zhu Fonian revised EĀ around 410, and that the extant T125 is the product of these revisions. Lin argues that the excerpts from an "EĀ" in JLYX are too different from the extant T125 to stem from the same text. He holds that these citations are remnants of the original "Dharmanandin" translation, produced by Dao'an's team in Chang'an in 384-385. Lin's main basis for this identification is the fact that the highest juan number mentioned in JLYX is 41—which is also the number of fascicles reported for the original translation by Dao'an; Lin also believes he can show other structural homologies between the fascicle numbers reported in JLYX, and information or inferences about this original 41-fascicle version.

The received T126 differs substantially from both the JLYX citations and Saṅghadeva's style. Lin proposes that T125—which is longer than the original, if we judge by number of fascicles—was produced by a revision and expansion of the first translation (not a new translation). He then considers three candidates for the author of these revisions: Saṅghadeva, Dharmanandin, and Zhu Fonian. He eliminates Dharmanandin on the grounds that he supposedly left China soon after the initial translation of both Āgamas (125) [Lin is seemingly unaware of the translation date of 391 for T2045 --- MR]. Lin also eliminates Saṅghadeva, on the basis of examination of the catalogues, and on the cogent grounds that the translation style of T125 differs too greatly from Saṅghadeva's style as evidenced by MĀ T25 (126-132). He then shows that the wording of five formulae in T125 is unique to Zhu Fonian's translations, establishing that Zhu Fonian is the translator (130-134); and further, by comparison of a single passage in a JLYX citation with the T125 parallel, that the T125 version alone contains a pair of further formulaic items unique to Zhu Fonian (135-136), thus supposedly establishing that the revisions that transformed the original translation into our extant T125 were also achieved by Zhu Fonian.

Lin dates this conjectured revision by Zhu Fonian to ca. 410 CE. I cannot discover his reasons for this date.

Edit

 Lin Jia'an argues that Zhu Fonian revised EA around 410, and that the extant T125 is the product of these revisions. Lin argues that the excerpts from an "EA" in JLYX are too different from the extant T125 to stem from the same text. He holds that these citations are remnants of the original "Dharmanandin" translation, produced by Dao'an's team in Chang'an in 384-385. Lin's main basis for this identification is the fact that the highest juan number mentioned in JLYX is 41—which is also the number of fascicles reported for the original translation by Dao'an; Lin also believes he can show other structural homologies between the fascicle numbers reported in JLYX, and information or inferences about this original 41-fascicle version. The received T126 differs substantially from both the JLYX citations and Sanghadeva's style. Lin proposes that T125—which is longer than the original, if we judge by number of fascicles—was produced by a revision and expansion of the first translation (not a new translation). He then considers three candidates for the author of these revisions: Sanghadeva, Dharmanandin, and Zhu Fonian. He eliminates Dharmanandin on the grounds that he supposedly left China soon after the initial translation of both Agamas (125) [Lin is seemingly unaware of the translation date of 391 for T2045 --- MR]. Lin also eliminates Sanghadeva, on the basis of examination of the catalogues, and on the cogent grounds that the translation style of T125 differs too greatly from Sanghadeva's style as evidenced by MA T25 (126-132). He then shows that the wording of five formulae in T125 is unique to Zhu Fonian's translations, establishing that Zhu Fonian is the translator (130-134); and further, by comparison of a single passage in a JLYX citation with the T125 parallel, that the T125 version alone contains a pair of further formulaic items unique to Zhu Fonian (135-136), thus supposedly establishing that the revisions that transformed the original translation into our extant T125 were also achieved by Zhu Fonian. Lin dates this conjectured revision by Zhu Fonian to ca. 410 CE. I cannot discover his reasons for this date. Zhu Fonian 竺佛念 T0125; Ekottarikagama; 增壹阿含經