Source: Fang and Gao 2012a

Fang Yixin 方一新 and Gao Lieguo 高列過. Dong Han yi wei Fojing de yuyan xue kaobian yanjiu 東漢疑偽佛經的語言學考辨研究. Beijing: Renmin chubanshe, 2012.

Assertions

Assertion Argument Place in source Search

The question of whether the Banzhou sanmei jing 般舟三昧經 (Pratyutpannabuddhasaṃmukhāvasthitasamādhi-sūtra) T418 was translated by Lokakṣema remains a subject of debate. Fang and Gao question the attribution of T418 to Lokakṣema. They state that T418 differs from translations reliably ascribed to Lokakṣema and the E. Han. It is more like a translation of the W. Jin, as it contains a set of vocabulary that only appear in translations from that era.

Fang and Gao examine eight phrases that are found in both T417 and T418. Among these phrases, Five (group a) never appear in the translations of Lokakṣema and the E. Han, and three (group b) are absent from translations of the E. Han. The eight phrases are:

a) 一切魔, 三昧力, 四面阿須倫王, 白衣菩薩, 學士
b) 聽我說譬喻, 助其歡喜/助歡喜, the classifier 頭

Edit

191-199

 The question of whether the Banzhou sanmei jing 般舟三昧經 (Pratyutpannabuddhasammukhavasthitasamadhi-sutra) T418 was translated by Lokaksema remains a subject of debate. Fang and Gao question the attribution of T418 to Lokaksema. They state that T418 differs from translations reliably ascribed to Lokaksema and the E. Han. It is more like a translation of the W. Jin, as it contains a set of vocabulary that only appear in translations from that era. Fang and Gao examine eight phrases that are found in both T417 and T418. Among these phrases, Five (group a) never appear in the translations of Lokaksema and the E. Han, and three (group b) are absent from translations of the E. Han. The eight phrases are: a) 一切魔, 三昧力, 四面阿須倫王, 白衣菩薩, 學士 b) 聽我說譬喻, 助其歡喜/助歡喜, the classifier 頭 Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 T0418; 般舟三昧經

The Banzhou sanmei jing 般舟三昧經 T417 is attributed to Lokakṣema in the Taishō canon, but scholars have questioned this attribution. Fang and Guo argue that it is impossible that T417 was translated by Lokakṣema, and instead, it more likely postdates the W. Jin. This assertion is based on their examination of the phraseology and grammar in T417. They specifically analyze two types of phraseology (see below), revealing that many expressions in this scripture cannot be found in the translations from the E. Han, but do appear in texts postdating the W. Jin.

a) Buddhist terminology:
八種聲/萬億音, 劫波育衣, 聖性, 西方阿彌陀佛, 須真天子, 須摩提, 一切疑, 正真慧, 總持門

b) idiom 習語:
妻子男女, 自識宿命, 恣汝所問, 如毛髮許, 貪財利色

In terms of grammar, they examine certain interrogative pronouns in T418, which show significant differences compared to the translations from the E. Han and those attributed to Lokakṣema:

云何, 何以故, 何等, 何, 何所, 何所, 幾, 何人, 所以者何

Edit

172-199

 The Banzhou sanmei jing 般舟三昧經 T417 is attributed to Lokaksema in the Taisho canon, but scholars have questioned this attribution. Fang and Guo argue that it is impossible that T417 was translated by Lokaksema, and instead, it more likely postdates the W. Jin. This assertion is based on their examination of the phraseology and grammar in T417. They specifically analyze two types of phraseology (see below), revealing that many expressions in this scripture cannot be found in the translations from the E. Han, but do appear in texts postdating the W. Jin. a) Buddhist terminology: 八種聲/萬億音, 劫波育衣, 聖性, 西方阿彌陀佛, 須真天子, 須摩提, 一切疑, 正真慧, 總持門 b) idiom 習語: 妻子男女, 自識宿命, 恣汝所問, 如毛髮許, 貪財利色 In terms of grammar, they examine certain interrogative pronouns in T418, which show significant differences compared to the translations from the E. Han and those attributed to Lokaksema: 云何, 何以故, 何等, 何, 何所, 何所, 幾, 何人, 所以者何 Anonymous (China), 失譯, 闕譯, 未詳撰者, 未詳作者, 不載譯人 T0417; Pratyutpannabuddhasammukhavasthitasamadhi-sutra; 般舟三昧經