A Study of Santideva's Bodhisattvacaryavatara as Found in the Tibetan Manuscripts from Tun-huang

目前的研究涉及早期版本的阿提卡的Bodyvacaryavatra，仅见于敦煌藏文手稿中，我在1986年发表的文章中首次确定了这一点。作为本研究的最后成果之一，我已经制作了一本小册子，准备提交给教育部。这本小册子包含了导言、圣628和629的第八章的音译文本，以及对早期版本Bodhanvacaryavataravivrtti [panjika]的评论的批判性编辑文本，这也是我在以前的文章中确定的。对早期版本的分析以及两个版本的比较，即，前（1）和后（2）两个版本的《藏礼》，明确了以下有关文本、内容和作者姓名差异的重要事实：1《藏礼》（1）的作者阿克赛买提很可能是《藏礼》的昵称之一。2《藏礼》（1）无论是在文本还是在体系上，都明显比现行《藏礼》（2）更真实。3两个版本不仅在节数（701.5 vs.913）和章数（9 vs.10）上有所不同，而且在藏文翻译文本上也有所不同，在许多情况下，梵文原文也有所不同。

The present research deals with the earlier version of Santideva's Bodhisattvacaryavatra as exclusively found in the Tibetan manuscripts from Tun-huang, which I first identified as such in my article published in 1986. As one of the final results of the present research, I have made a booklet to be submitted to the Ministry of Education. The booklet contains the introduction, the transliterated texts of the eighth chapter of the St. 628 & 629, and the critically edited text of the commentary on the earlier version, Bodhisattvacaryavataravivrtti[panjika], which was also identified by myself in my previous article. The analysis of the earlier version and also the comparison of the two versions, i.e., the earlier((1)) and the later((2)) versions of the BCA, have made clear the following important facts concerning the texts, contents and the difference of the author's names:1 Aksayamati, the author of the BCA(1), must most probably be one of the nicknames of Santideva.2 The BCA(1) is, clearly, more authentic than the current BCA(2) in terms of both the text and the system of the BCA.3 Both versions differ not only in their numbers of stanzas (701.5 vs.913) and chapters (9 vs.10), but also in their texts of the Tibetan translation and, in many cases, the original Sanskrit as well.