Abstract
ABSTRACTIn studying the Chinese Buddhist canon, or even individual texts preserved in different editions of the canon, scholars have concentrated too much on its printed editions. This emphasis has been to the negligence of three kinds of major sources that may closely bear on the studies of the Chinese Buddhist canon: (1) the manuscript editions of the canon, which were generally created before the printed edition, or Buddhist manuscripts hand-copied individually; (2) secular sources not included in various editions of the canon (the so-called extra-canonical sources); and finally, (3) canonical texts with quotes or paraphrases of earlier ones, scriptural or non-scriptural. This article by no means intends to address these issues with a comprehensiveness that they deserve. Rather, it will limit itself to some passing remarks on these issues.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
