Source: Fang and Gao 2008

Fang Yixin 方一新 and Gao Lieguo 高列過. “Jiuti An Shigao yi Taizi Mupo jing fanyi niandai kaobian — jian lun ti Zhu Fahu yi Taizi Mupo jing de niandai wenti” 舊題安世高譯《太子慕魄經》翻譯年代考辨——兼論題竺法護譯《太子墓魄經》的年代問題.” Wenshi 文史 3 (2008): 77–99. Republished in Fang and Gao, Dong Han yi wei Fojing de yuyan xue kaobian yanjiu 東漢疑偽佛經的語言學考辨研究, 148–171. Beijing: Renmin chubanshe, 2012.

Assertions

Assertion Argument Place in source Search

In the Taishō canon, the Mūkapaṅgu (P. Mūgapakka) Sūtra 太子慕魄經 T167 is ascribed to An Shigao, while another similar scripture, the Mūkapaṅgu Sūtra 太子墓魄經 T168, is attributed to Dharmarakṣa. Fang and Gao first survey the evidence of the catalogues, to argue that only one version of the text was known under the Liang; the second appears under the Sui, whereupon the ascriptions to An Shigao and Dharmaraksa are added in LDSBJ, and subsequently cemented in place by Zhisheng in KYL. They also ascertain that excerpts in JLYX T2121 are from T167, and in FYZL T2122 from T168.

The authors then examine specific phraseological and grammatical elements from T167. They argue that Dharmarakṣa translated T167, as it shares linguistic features with Dharmarakṣa’s other translations, while T168 could be an anonymous translation produced after the Southern Liang Dynasty, as its linguistic features are not associated with Dharmarakṣa.

The main evidence the authors use to support their arguments is as follows:

1) Phraseology: 驂駕, 誑詐, 陵易, 甚用, ~怪所以, 兩目並青 (面目竝青), 乃如是也, 求死不得/欲生不得, V著一面（e.g. 持著一面）
2) Grammar: 了 and 不復 (modal adverb); 傾 (adverb of time) in “未+V+傾”; 取(pleonastic) in “V+取+Object”； interrogative starting with 豈復.

Edit

 In the Taisho canon, the Mukapangu (P. Mugapakka) Sutra 太子慕魄經 T167 is ascribed to An Shigao, while another similar scripture, the Mukapangu Sutra 太子墓魄經 T168, is attributed to Dharmaraksa. Fang and Gao first survey the evidence of the catalogues, to argue that only one version of the text was known under the Liang; the second appears under the Sui, whereupon the ascriptions to An Shigao and Dharmaraksa are added in LDSBJ, and subsequently cemented in place by Zhisheng in KYL. They also ascertain that excerpts in JLYX T2121 are from T167, and in FYZL T2122 from T168. The authors then examine specific phraseological and grammatical elements from T167. They argue that Dharmaraksa translated T167, as it shares linguistic features with Dharmaraksa’s other translations, while T168 could be an anonymous translation produced after the Southern Liang Dynasty, as its linguistic features are not associated with Dharmaraksa. The main evidence the authors use to support their arguments is as follows: 1) Phraseology: 驂駕, 誑詐, 陵易, 甚用, ~怪所以, 兩目並青 (面目竝青), 乃如是也, 求死不得/欲生不得, V著一面(e.g. 持著一面) 2) Grammar: 了 and 不復 (modal adverb); 傾 (adverb of time) in “未+V+傾”; 取(pleonastic) in “V+取+Object”; interrogative starting with 豈復. Dharmaraksa 竺法護, 曇摩羅察 T0167; 太子慕魄經