Source: Gu 2016

Gu Manlin 顧滿林. “Dong Han Fojing yuliao wenti juyu –– Cong Zhong benqi jing ‘Jin yan’ shuoqi” 東漢佛經語料問題舉隅——從《中本起經》“晉言”說起. In Hanyu shi xuebao 漢語史學報 16, edited by Zhejiang daxue hanyu shi yanjiu zhongxin 浙江大學漢語史研究中心, 240–250. Shanghai: Shanghai jiaoyu chubanshe, 2016.

Assertions

Assertion Argument Place in source Search

The Xiuxing benqi jing 修行本起經 T184, ascribed to Zhu Dali 竺大力 and Kang Mengxiang 康孟詳, includes eight interlinear annotations reading, “A (B in Chinese)” A 漢言 B. Gu, following the widely accepted view that T184 is not a genuine Eastern Han translation, argues that the A 漢言 B annotations may not necessarily originate from the Han.

Gu further reinforces his argument by examining the same and similar annotations, such as A 漢云 B, A 漢曰 B, A 漢解 B, in Lokakṣema’s translations. He discovers that these interlinear notes only appear in three texts (T313, T624 and T626), which are considered unreliable Lokakṣema translations by Nattier (2008). In conclusion, he posits that such interlinear annotations provide sufficient evidence to prove that T184 is a translation from the Eastern Han Dynasty.

Edit

 The Xiuxing benqi jing 修行本起經 T184, ascribed to Zhu Dali 竺大力 and Kang Mengxiang 康孟詳, includes eight interlinear annotations reading, “A (B in Chinese)” A 漢言 B. Gu, following the widely accepted view that T184 is not a genuine Eastern Han translation, argues that the A 漢言 B annotations may not necessarily originate from the Han. Gu further reinforces his argument by examining the same and similar annotations, such as A 漢云 B, A 漢曰 B, A 漢解 B, in Lokaksema’s translations. He discovers that these interlinear notes only appear in three texts (T313, T624 and T626), which are considered unreliable Lokaksema translations by Nattier (2008). In conclusion, he posits that such interlinear annotations provide sufficient evidence to prove that T184 is a translation from the Eastern Han Dynasty. T0184; 修行本起經