In this paper the authors edit two Old Uigur fragments that recently became accessible from Dunhuang. Both are parts of the unknown commentary on the Yuanjue jing of which already some other remnants were edited.
Kanno H. (2002): Chinese Buddhist Sūtra Commentaries of the Early Period. Conference of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, Bangkok.
Karashima, S. (1998): A Glossary of Dharmaraksa's Translation of the Lotus
Kudara, Kōgi (1992): Uiguruyaku Engakukyō to sono chūshaku [An Uigur version of the Yuanjue Jing and its commentary]. In: Ryūkoku Kiyō 14, pp. 1–23. German translation by Yukiyo Kasai (2013): Das uigurische
In this paper the authors edit two Old Uigur fragments that have recently become accessible from Dunhuang. The first is part of a poem on the famous story of King Bimbasāra and his wife Vaidehī that was popular in Pure Land Buddhism. The second is a kind of a commentary that uses Chinese phrases in original Chinese script.
This commentary addresses a recent article on the characterization of muscle dysmorphia as an addiction. The commentary examines the larger issue of the possible relationship of compulsions to addictions. It also questions whether understanding the heterogeneity within disorders may be a useful tactic to develop more targeted treatment approaches.
A new translation of
was recently published with an extensive commentary.
The translator and the commentator are not the same person, therefore they can
have different views on the meaning of the text. The paper discusses some
passages from the translation, especially highlighting the method of quoting
after certain words the original Greek word in parentheses. This method calls
attention to the original identity of different words. The method, however was
not applied consistently. The same Greek word in some places appears in
parentheses after its Hungarian version; in other places it does not. There are
too many misprints in the book, but the commentary helps the reader, since it
sometimes refers to better versions of the translation than the actually
printed ones. The commentary must have been written to a previous version of
the translation, which did not yet contain the misprints. After the discussion
of some problematic passages of the commentary the last part of the paper
contains some remarks on the section headings the commentator supplied. They
can help orient the reader, but they are not distinguished from the body of the
text clearly enough. On the other hand, a section heading determines a reading
strategy for the following passage, and a reader can hardly avoid this