In previous work, I have shown that the (Mainstream, “smaller”) Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra ascribed to Faxian is in fact almost certainly not his work, and that internal evidence closely associates it with two other texts: the Guoqu xianzai yinguo jing ascribed to Guṇabhadra and the *Mahāmāyā-sūtra ascribed to Tanjing. This paper analyzes the content of these texts, in order to ascertain (as much as possible) their likely relation to one another; the context in which they were composed; and their relations to that context. In addressing questions of context, the analysis applies innovative computer-assisted methods, which allow us to pinpoint detailed clues of highly specific intertextual relationships among a broad range of texts. This enables us to discover in the present triad of texts internal evidence pointing to close relations to a very specific body of literature in the fifth century.
目次
Introduction 1 Funayama's Category of Texts "Between Translation and Composition" 5 Analysis of T383 7 Analysis of TI89 16 Conclusions 24 Discussion: Broader Implications and Hints for Future Research 25 Acknowledgement 28 Bibliography 28
