Paramârtha is also commonly referred to as Zhendi Sanzang 眞諦三藏, the 'Trepiṭaka Paramârtha.' Chinese sources transcribe 'Paramârtha' as 波羅末陀 (T 2060.50.429c6). Paramârthaʼs original Indian name was *Kulanâtha, variously transcribed 拘羅那陀 (T 1719.34.312c3, T 1723.34.659a23); or (by metathesis) 拘那羅陀 (e.g. T 2060.50.429c6, T 2131.54.1071a10); or even 拘那陀羅 (T 2036.49.555a9–10). The reconstruction *Kulanâtha is supported by a translation, Qinyi 親依 (T 2060.50.429c6). Zhikaiʼs 智愷 Preface to the Awakening of Faith gives Paramârthaʼs name as 拘蘭難陀, which should correspond rather to *Kulānanda (三藏拘蘭難陀，譯名眞諦; T 1666.32.575a18–19). Note, however, that this preface has been regarded as apocryphal by modern scholars; against which Chen (1948/1980) has argued in turn that the preface includes a quantity of unusually accurate historical information.

The principal sources for information about Paramârthaʼs life are, first, the extensive biography in the Xu gaoseng zhuan 續高僧傳 T 2060.50.429c6ff.; supplemented by information in prefaces to some of his important works, such as the Mahāyānasaṃgraha-bhāṣya (T 1595.31.152a25–153b26) and the Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya (T 1559.29.161a5–b28), and the aforementioned, dubious preface to the Awakening of Faith (T 1666.32.575a6–b5). For a full list of sources, see Funayama (2012b): 3. The most detailed information on Paramârthaʼs biography in English is Paul (1984): 11–37.

Paramârtha traveled throughout India and then stayed in Funan 扶南國 (present-day Cambodia) for an unknown length of time. In 546, he was invited to the Liang by Emperor Wu 梁武帝 (r. 502–549). He proceeded to Jiankang 建康 where he is said to have begun translating Buddhist texts. However, Wudi died before Paramârtha could produce many translations, and after the emperorʼs demise, political conditions deteriorated rapidly. Various degrees of chaos prevailed for the remainder of Paramârthaʼs career. He ended up having to move from place to place on a fairly regular basis, and was rarely able to work for extended periods with a stable team. He is said to have contemplated returning to India on more than one occasion, perhaps from a sense of the futility of his work; and his disciples are also said to have once narrowly averted his suicide by a last-minute intervention. Thus, his output of sixty-four translations in 278 fascicles is nothing short of amazing. Paramârtha spent the last years of his life in the region of Canton, where he enjoyed the patronage of two local notables, a father and son named Ouyang (Ishida 1979).

Paramârtha is attributed with the following extant works:

1. Arthavistara sūtra廣義法門經 T 97
2. Vajracchedikā prajñāpāramitā  金剛般若波羅蜜經 T 237
3. Four chapters of the Suvarṇabhāsôttama-sūtra 合部金光明經 T 664
4. Wushangyi jing 無上依經 (*Anuttarâśraya-sūtra?) T 669
5. Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra 解節經 T 677
6. Lü ershier mingliao lun 律二十二明了論 T 1461
7. Fo Apitan jing chujia xiang pin 佛阿毘曇經出家相品 T 1482
8. Niepan jing ben you jin wu jie lun 涅槃經本有今無偈論 T 1528
9. Yijiao jing lun 遺教經論 T 1529
10. Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya 阿毘達磨倶舍釋論 T 1559
11. Jueding zang lun 決定藏論 T 1584
12. Zhuanshi lun 轉識論T 1587
13. Triṃśikā (*Mahāyāna vijñaptimātratāsiddhi) 大乘唯識論 T 1589
14. Mahāyānasaṃgraha 攝大乘論 T 1593
15. Mahāyānasaṃgrahabhāṣya 攝大乘論釋 T 1595
16. Madhyântavibhāga 中邊分別論 T 1599
17. Foxing lun 佛性論 T 1610
18. Shiba kong lun 十八空論 T 1616
19. San wuxing lun 三無性論 T 1617
20. Xianshi lun 顯識論 T 1618
21. Alaṃbanaparīkṣā 無相思塵論 T 1619
22. Hastavālaprakaraṇa 解捲論 T 1620
23. Rushi lun fan zhinan pin 如實論反質難品 T 1633
24. Suixiang lun jie shiliu di yi 隨相論解十六諦義 T 1641
25. *Lokasthânâbhidharma-śāstra 立世阿毘曇論 T 1644
26. Si di lun 四諦論 T 1647
27. Ratnāvalī 寶行王正論 T 1656
28. Dasheng qi xin lun 大乘起信論 T 1666
29. Da zong di xuan wen ben lun 大宗地玄文本論 T 1669
30. Samayabhedoparacanacakra 十八部論 T 2032
31. Samayabhedoparacanacakra 部執異論 T 2033
32. Posoupandou fashi zhuan ( 'Biography of the Dharma Master Vasubandhu' ) 婆藪槃豆法師傳 T 2049
33. Sāṃkhyakārikā (and commentary) 金七十論 T 2137

Some of these translations were extremely influential. In particular, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha (T 1593) and especially its accompanying bhāṣya (T 1595) were the principal works through which Yogâcāra ideas were first seriously digested and understood by important Chinese scholar monks, and helped Chinese thinkers to clearly define the distinctions between the categories of Mahāyāna and 'Hīnayāna.' So influential was the text that a key school of doctrine and interpretation in the sixth to seventh centuries was named after it, the 'Shelun school'  攝論宗; as the translator of the root text, Paramârtha was regarded as the founder of that school.

Paramârthaʼs next most significant surviving work, not least in the place it assumed in the work of his group, is surely his translation of the Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya (T 1559), the first translation of that work into Chinese. Another key work was the Madhyânta-vibhāga 中邊分別論, which, like the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, was important in making Yogâcāra ideas better known in China. His translation of the Lü ershier mingliao lun (T 1461) is one of our main sources for knowledge of the Sāṃmitīya school, and incidentally, the principal evidence for the consensus understanding in modern scholarship that Paramârtha himself was probably ordained in a Sāṃmitīya lineage. Paramârtha was also the first translator to make available in Chinese the works of Dignāga 陳那, though the works he translated were small, and had little discernable impact at the time (Alaṃbanaparīkṣā (T 1619) and Hastavālaprakaraṇa T 1620). His Rushi lun T 1633 (*Tarkaśāstra?) is also an early source for Buddhist 'logico-epistemological' (pramāṇa, 因明) ideas, though the text is difficult to understand (Vassiliev 1937; Tucci 1929 [1981]: 1–40). His translation of the Sāṃkhyakārikā includes an otherwise unknown commentary, which has therefore been a key source for modern scholars in understanding the early interpretation of the root text (cf. Takakusu 1904b). Another influential text was the Suvarṇa(pra)prabhāsôttama-sūtra 金光明經, which had already been translated earlier by *Dharmakṣema 曇無讖 (金光明經 T 663). Only four chapters from Paramârthaʼs translation were preserved in the canon as incorporated into Baoguiʼs 寶貴 Hebu jin guangming jing 合部金光明經 T 664. However, a manuscript representing five of an original seven fascicles survives in the Shōgozō 聖語藏.

In addition to the extant works, tradition reports that Paramârtha and his group produced more than thirty further works which have been lost. These lost works included translations, most significantly, the Shiqi di lun 十七地論 (*Saptadaśabhūmi śāstra?), an early and partial translation of the Yogâcārabhūmi that is said to have still been extant in the time of Xuanzang. We even read reports, oddly enough, of a supposed re-translation of a text regarded by modern scholars as composed in China, namely, the 'Sutra for Humane Kings' (Renwang bore jing 仁王般若經); however, citations preserved in the works of Woncheuk 圓測 indicate that when Paramârtha commented on that text, the wording was identical to the version ascribed to Kumārajīva, suggesting that reports of Paramârthaʼs re-translation are inaccurate (Funayama [2012b]: 44–45). They also included numerous commentaries, and modern scholars have suggested that such works probably recorded lectures given by Paramârtha alongside the work of translation. One of the striking features of the lost commentaries reported by tradition is that they include commentary on works known only in China, most notably the Renwang jing; Funayama shows by citation of later fragments that this tradition is probably in some sense true (Funayama [2012b]: 44–45). Fragments of the lost commentaries which have been preserved by quotation in later works are currently the focus of a major ongoing study led by Funayama Tōru; a list of the most important sources for such fragments, and methodological problems in their study, etc., may be found at Funayama (2012b): 23–28.

For fuller surveys of works ascribed to Paramârtha, see Funayama (2012b): 14–25, Radich (2012).

One notable feature of Paramârthaʼs translation texts is that they seem to include, to an unusual extent, passages and sections which probably also originated as 'lecture' material (similar to the material that may have been recorded in the lost commentaries), but which are incorporated as if part of the translated root text; Funayama (2005), (2006b): 50–55. This is only one sense in which works in the Paramârtha corpus can be regarded as prime examples of texts sitting on a middle ground 'between translation and composition' in Chinese Buddhism, for which see Funayama (2006a).

The ambiguity between translated material and other content is, in turn, only one of several senses in which the Paramârtha corpus is riddled with difficult problems of authorship. Most famously, Paramârtha is problematically attributed with the translation of the Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith 大乘起信論 T 1666. Most modern scholars no longer follow this attribution (see e.g. Demiéville 1929). The Da zong di xuan wen ben lun T 1669 is regarded as a Daoist apocryphon. Most scholars now think that the Wushangyi jing (T 669 ) was composed in China, possibly by Paramârtha himself (Takasaki [1966]: 49–53). If T 669 was composed in China, it follows that the Foxing lun (T 1610), which cites it, must similarly have been composed in China, which is now the standard view (Takasaki [1966]: 47–53); though a few scholars still hold out for the traditional ascription to Vasubandhu (e.g. Yao [2014]: 323 n. 25, following Takemura). One of two versions of the Samabhedoparacanacakra ascribed to Paramârtha, T 2032, is usually thought to in fact be by Kumārajīva (see e.g. Demiéville [1924]: 48 n. 1). The Yi jiao jing lun T 1529 is also commonly thought not to be by Paramârtha (Ishii [2012]: 88 and 116 n. 7, citing Ōtake [2011]: 400). Radich (2014a, 2015 forthcoming) has argued that the four chapters ascribed to Paramârtha in Baoguiʼs T 664 have a complex range of hitherto unobserved Chinese sources, and were most likely composed in China. (However, this case is further complicated by the fact that the 'Three Bodies' = *trikāya chapter has clear parallels in the *Kāyatrayāvatāramukha = sKu gsum la 'jug pa'i sgo zhes bya ba'i bstan bcos, D3980/Q5290, as has been shown by Hamano [1984, 1985].) In the other direction, although it is not traditionally ascribed to Paramârtha, Ishii (2012) has argued on the grounds of computer-assisted studies of style that the Sanmidu bu lun 三彌底部論 (*Sāṃmitīya-nikāya-śāstra; T 1649 ) might also be Paramârthaʼs work.

The best summary of the current state of scholarly knowledge on Paramârtha and his works is Funayama (2012b). Ui Hakuju devoted a full volume of his Indo tetsugaku kenkyū (1926–1932) to the study of key Paramârtha works. Iwata Ryōzō 岩田良三 (who also published as Iwata Taijō 岩田諦靜) published a large number of articles on aspects of Paramârthaʼs Yogâcāra works, which we will not list here; and also two monographs (Iwata 1981, 2004). Other works of note include Ishii (2012) and Keng (2009). Funayama (2012a) presents the findings of a group of scholars who worked under Funayamaʼs leadership between 2005 and 2011 on a significant investigation of Paramârthaʼs works, further findings from which are still in preparation. A bibliography of key studies is given below.

Translations of texts in the Paramârtha corpus in European languages include Keenanʼs translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha (T 1593); Keenan, Griffiths, Hakamaya et al. (1989), which translates substantial parts of one chapter of the bhāṣya (T 1595); translations by Hakeda (1967) and Girard (2004) of the Awakening of Faith (T 1666); Takakusuʼs (1904b) translation of the Sāṃkhya-kārikā (T 2137); a translation of Zhuanshi lun (T 1587) included in Paul (1984); translations by Takakusu (1904a) and Li and Dahlia (2002) of the 'Life of Vasubandhu' (T 2049); and Hahnʼs work (1982) on the Ratnāvalī. Sastri (1942) back-translated the Alaṃbanaparīkṣā into Sanskrit in part on the basis of T 1619, and Tucci (1929/1981) back-translated the Rushi lun (T 1633). Substantial studies on other aspects of individual works include Demiéville (1931–1932) on the Samayabhedoparacanacakra and fragments preserved in citations of Paramârthaʼs comments thereon; Hirakawaʼs Index to various versions of the Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya; Hakamaya (1979) on the Jueding zang lun T 1584; Tucci (1929/1981) on the Rushi lun (T 1633); Yamaguchi (1929) on the Alaṃbanaparīkṣā (T 1619); Thomas and Ui (1918) on the Hastavālaprakaraṇa (T 1620); and Paul (1984) on the Zhuanshi lun (T 1587).

Paramârtha is renowned for having articulated a concept of 'taintless consciousness' (阿摩羅識, *amalavijñāna), which he is said in later Chinese reports to have presented as a 'ninth consciousness'  九識, supernumerary to the standard Yogâcāra scheme of eight. On occasion, this concept has been presented as a key example of Paramârthaʼs synthesis of Tathāgatagarbha and Yogâcāra ideas, and/or as evidence of Paramârthaʼs attempts to accommodate his teachings to a Chinese audience, and therefore, as a part of the process of so-called 'sinification' of Buddhist ideas. Radich (2008) has studied in detail the primary texts in the Paramârtha corpus in which this concept is presented (namely, Jueding zang lun [T 1584], Shiba kong lun [T 1616], Zhuanshi lun [T 1587], and San wuxing lun [T 1617]), and its reception and interpretation in Chinese sources to 800 CE. Radich (2014b) studies an important part of the Chinese background of the concept. The above-mentioned problems of authorship, and the apparent presence of lecture-style material in texts also including translation content, makes it difficult to be certain of the exact authorship and background of passages expounding *amalavijñāna .

As the list of his works shows, Paramârtha was interested and learned in a range of Mahāyāna texts and doctrines, including Prajñāpāramitā, and the 'Mahāparinirvāṇa' literature; and beyond Mahāyāna, in Āgamas (T 97), Abhidharma (Abhidharmakośa), Vinaya (Lü ershi'er mingliao lun), doxography (Samayabhedoparacanacakra), biography, belles-lettres (Ratnāvalī), and even non-Buddhist Indian philosophy (Sāṃkhya-kārikā). However, his primary concerns fell in the areas of Yogâcāra 唯識 and Tathāgatagarbha 如來藏 thought, which he tended to treat together as part of a single broad tradition. The influence of Tathāgatagarbha thought upon his works is thought to have led to a blending of these two doctrinal streams in his writings, which in turn may have brought about a profound and lasting impact on the subsequent trajectory of these 'mind-only' schools of thought in East Asian Buddhism. On the other hand, during the century following his death, East Asian Yogâcāra scholars such as Xuanzang 玄奘 came to doubt the faithfulness of some of his translations to the original Yogâcāra doctrine, and such doubts motivated Xuanzang to personally go to India to obtain copies of Sanskrit original works.

Sources:

Chen Yinque 陳寅恪. 1980. “Liang yi Dasheng qi xin lun wei Zhikai xu zhong zhi zhen shiliao 梁譯大乘起信論偽智愷序中之真史料 .”  In Chen Yinque wenji zhi san: Jinming guan cong gao er bian陳寅恪文集之三　金明館叢稿二編 . Shanghai:  Shanghai guji chubanshe. 147–152.

Demiéville, Paul. 1924. “Les versions chinoises du Miliṇḍapañha.” BÉFEO 24 : 1–253.

----. 1929. “Sur l'authenticité du Ta tch'eng k'i sin luoen.” Bulletin de la maison français-japonais 2 (2): 1–78.

----. 1931–32. “L'origine des sectes bouddhiques d'apres Paramartha.” Mélanges chinois et bouddhiques 1 : 15–62.

Frauwallner, Erich. 1951. “Amalavijñānam und Ālayavijñānam: Ein Beitrag zur Erkenntnislehre des Buddhismus.” Beiträge zur indischen Philologie und Altertumskunde, Walter Schubring zum 70. Geburtstag dargebrachtHamburg:  De Gruyter  : 148–159.

Fuji Ryūsei 藤隆生. 1965. “Shōron gakuha ni okeru amara Amala shiki no mondai 摂論学派における阿摩羅Amala 識の問題 .” Bukkyō bunka kenkyūjo kiyō 仏教文化研究所紀要  4 : 113–117.

Funayama Tōru 船山徹. 2005. “Shintai sanzō no chosaku no tokuchō - Chū-In bunka kōshō no rei toshite 真諦三蔵著作の特徴 – 中印文化交渉の例として (The Distinguishing Features of the Works of Paramârtha: A Case-Study in Sino-Indian Cultural Exchange)Kansai daigaku tōsaigakujutsu kenkyūjo kiyō 関西大学東西学術研究所紀要  38 : 97–122.

----. 2006. “Kan'yaku to chūgoku senjutsu no aida: kanbun butten ni tokuyū na keitai wo megutte 「漢訳」と「中国撰述」の間──漢文仏典に特有な形態をめぐって (Between Chinese Translation and Chinese Composition: On a Particular Configuration in Chinese Buddhist Scriptures)Bukkyō shigaku kenkyū仏教史学研究  45 (1): 1–28.

Funayama, Tōru. 2006. “Masquerading as Translation: Examples of Chinese Lectures by Indian Scholar-Monks in the Six Dynasties Period.” Asia Major 19 (1–2): 39–55.

----. 2008. “The Work of Paramârtha: An Example of Sino-Indian Cross-Cultural Exchange.”  In JIABS. vol. 31 (1–2)141–183.

Funayama, Tōru, ed. 2012. Shintai sanzō kenkyū ronshū 真諦三藏研究論集 (Studies of the Works and Influence of Paramârtha). Kyoto:  Kyōto daigaku jinbun kagaku kenkyūjo/Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University.

----. 2012. “Shintai no katsudō to chosaku no kihonteki tokuchō 眞諦の活動と著作の基本的特徴 .”  In ----, ed. Shintai sanzō kenkyū ronshū 真諦三藏研究論集 (Studies of the Works and Influence of Paramârtha). Kyoto:  Kyōto daigaku jinbun kagaku kenkyūjo/Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University. 1–86.

Girard, Frédéric. 2004. Traité sur l'acte de foi dans le Grand Véhicule. Tokyo:  Keio University Press.

Hahn, Michael. 1982. Nāgârjuna ʼs Ratnāvalī. Bonn:  Indica Et Tibetica Verlag.

Hakamaya Noriaki 袴谷憲昭. 1979. “Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī ni okeru ārayashiki no kitei / Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī におけるアーラヤ識の規定 (The Definition of Ālayavijñāna in the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī)Tōyō bunka kenkyūjo kiyō 東洋文化研究所紀要  79 : 1–79.

Hakeda, Yoshito S. 1967. The Awakening of Faith, Attributed to Aśvaghosha. New York:  Columbia University Press.

Hamano Tetsunori 浜野哲敬. 1984. “Sanjin nyūmon ron ni tsuite 『三身入門論』について .” IBK 32 (2): 162–163.

----. 1985. “Kon kōmyō kyō 'Sanjin funbetsu bon' ni tsuite 『金光明経・三身分別品』について .” IBK 33 (2): 296–299.

Hirakawa, Akira. 1973. Index to the Abhidharmakośabhāṣya. Tokyo:  Daizō shuppan.

Ishida Yoshiyuki 石田徳行. 1979. “Ōyō Gi, Kotsu to bukkyō: Shintai to no kankei wo chūshin ni 欧陽頠・紇と仏教　真諦との関係を中心に .” Bukkyō shigaku kenkyū 仏教史学研究  22 (1): 41–59.

Ishii Kōsei 石井公成. 2012. “Shintai kan'yo bunken no yōgo to gohō: NGSM ni yoru hikaku bunseki真諦關與文獻の用語と語法―NGSMによる比較分析 (The Vocabulary and Syntax of Paramârthan Texts: A Comparative Analysis Using NGSM) In Funayama, Tōru, ed. Shintai sanzō kenkyū ronshū 真諦三藏研究論集 (Studies of the Works and Influence of Paramârtha). Kyoto:  Kyōto daigaku jinbun kagaku kenkyūjo/Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University. 87–120.

Iwata, Ryōzō. 1972. 1973. “Paramârthaʼs Trisvabhāva Theory.” IBK 21 (1): 355–357.  22 (1): 107–110.

Iwata Taijō 岩田諦静. 1981. Shoki yuishiki shisō kenkyū初期唯識思想研究 . Tokyo:  Daitō shuppansha.

----. 2004. Shintai no yuishiki setsu no kenkyū 真諦の唯識說の研究 . Kyoto:  Sankibō Busshorin.

Keenan, John P. 1992. The Summary of the Great Vehicle, by Bodhisattva Asaṅga, Translated from the Chinese of Paramârtha (Taishō, Volume 31, Number 1593). Berkeley:  Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research. BDK English Tripiṭaka. 46-III,

----. Paul J Griffiths, and Noriaki Hakamaya. 1989. The Realm of Awakening: A Translation and Study of the Tenth Chapter of Asaṅgaʼs Mahāyānasaṅgraha. New York:  Oxford University Press.

Keng, Ching. 2009. “Yogâcāra Buddhism Transmitted or Transformed? Paramârtha (499–569) and His Chinese Interpreters.” Harvard University.

Li, Rongxi, and Albert Dahlia, trans. 2002. “Biography of Dharma Master Vasubandhu.”  In Lives of Great Monks and Nuns. Berkeley:  Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research.

Lusthaus, Dan. 2002. Buddhist Phenomenology: A Philosophical Investigation of Yogācāra Buddhism and the Ch'eng Wei-shih Lun. London:  RoutledgeCurzon.

Ono Genmyo 小野玄妙. 1929. “Ryō Shintai yaku Kon kōmyō kyō jobun 梁真諦訳金光明経序文 .” Butten kenkyū仏典研究  1 (2): 5.

Paul, Diana Y. 1984. Philosophy of Mind in Sixth-Century China: Paramârthaʼs 'Evolution of Consciousness'. Stanford:  Stanford University Press.

Radich, Michael. 2008. “The Doctrine of *Amalavijñāna in Paramārtha (499–569), and Later Authors to Approximately 800 C.E.” Zinbun 41 : 45–174.

----. 2012. “External Evidence Relating to Works Ascribed to Paramârtha, with a Focus on Traditional Chinese Catalogues.”  In Funayama, Tōru, ed. Shintai sanzō kenkyū ronshū 真諦三藏研究論集 (Studies of the Works and Influence of Paramârtha). Kyoto:  Kyōto daigaku jinbun kagaku kenkyūjo/Institute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University. 39–102.

----. 2014. “On the Sources, Style and Authorship of Chapters of the Synoptic Suvarṇaprabhāsôttama-sūtra T664 Ascribed to Paramârtha (Part 1).” Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology 17 : 207–244.

----. 2014. “Ideas about 'Consciousness' in Fifth and Sixth Century Chinese Buddhist Debates on the Survival of Death by the Spirit, and the Chinese Background to *Amalavijñāna.”  In Lin, Chen-kuo, ----, ed. A Distant Mirror: Articulating Indic Ideas in Sixth and Seventh Century Chinese Buddhism. Hamburg:  Hamburg University Press. 471–512.

----. 2015. “Tibetan Evidence for the Sources of Chapters of the Synoptic Suvarṇaprabhāsottama-sūtra T664 Ascribed to Paramārtha.” Buddhist Studies Review 32 (2): 245–270.

Sastri, N. Aiyaswami. 1942. Ālaṁbanaparīkṣa and Vṛtti: Restored into Sanskrit from the Tibetan and Chinese Versions and ed. with English Translation and Notes. Madras:  Adyar Library. Adyar Library Series. 32,

Shengkai  圣凯. 2006. Shelun xuepai yanjiu 摄论学派研究 . Beijing:  Zongjiao wenhua chubanshe.

----. 2007. “Amoluoshi yu benjue: Shelun shi de 'amoluoshi' sixiang 阿摩罗识与本觉 – 摄论师的'阿摩罗识'思想 .” Dunhuangxue jikan 敦煌学辑刊  3 : 106–118.

Su Gongwang 蘇公望. 1936–1937. “Zhendi liuhua nianpu 真諦留華年譜.” Weimiao sheng微妙聲

----. 1978. “Zhendi sanzang yi shu kao 真諦三蔵訳述考 .”  In Fodian fanyi shilun 仏典翻訳史論 . Taibei:  Dasheng wenhua chubanshe. Xiandai fojiao xueshu congkan. 38,

Suryanarayanan, S. S. 1931. The Sāṃkhya Kārikā – Studied in the Light of its Chinese Version. Madras:  Translation of Takakusu 1904. .

Takakusu, Junjirō. 1904. “The Life of Vasubandhu by Paramârtha (A.D. 499–569).” T'oung Pao, Series 2 5 : 269–296.

Takakusu, M. J. 1904. “La Sāṃkhyakārikā étudiée à la lumière de sa version chinoise (I).” BÉFEO 4 : 1–65.

----. 1904. “La Sāṃkhyakārikā étudiée à la lumière de sa version chinoise (II).” BÉFEO 4 : 978–1061.

Takasaki Jikidō 高崎直道. 1981. “Shintai sanzō no shisō 真諦三蔵の思想 (The Thought of the Trepiṭaka Paramârtha) In Daijō bukkyō kara mikkyō e: Katsumata Shunkyō hakushi koki kinen ronshū 大乗仏教から密教へ　勝又俊教博士古希記念論集 . Tokyo:  Shunjūsha. 701–716.

----. 1966. A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga (Uttaratantra): Being a Treatise on the Tathāgatagarbha Theory of Mahāyāna Buddhism. Rome:  IsMEO.

Thomas, F.W, and Ui Hakuju. 1918. “The Hand Treatise: A Work of Āryadeva.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland: 267–310.

Tucci, Giuseppe. 1981 [1929]. Pre-Diṇnaga Buddhist Texts on Logic from Chinese Sources. Madras:  Vesta Publications.

Ui Hakuju. 1926–1932. Indo tetsugaku kenkyū 印度哲学研究 (A Study of Indian Philosophy). Tokyo:  Kōshisha Shobō. vol. VI

Vassiliev, Boris. 1937. “Ju-shih Lun: A Logical Treatise Ascribed to Vasubandhu.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 8 (4): 1013–1037.

Yamaguchi, Susumu. 1929. “Dignāga: Examen de l'objet de la connaissance (Ālaṃbana-parīkṣā). Textes tibétain et chinois et traduction des stances et du commentaire.” Journal Asiatique 214 : 1–65.

Yang Weizhong 楊維中. 2007. “Zhendi sanzang xingli jiqi yi Guangdong wei hexin de fanyi huodong kaoshi 眞諦三藏行歴及其以廣東爲核心的翻譯活動考實 .”  In Chanhe zhi sheng: Chan zong youxiu wenhua yu goujian hexie shehui xueshu yantao huilun wenji 禪和之聲 ── '禪宗優秀文化與構建和諧社會' 學術研討會論文集 . Beijing:  Zongjiao wenhua chubanshe. 40–357.

Yao, Zhihua. 2014. “Yogâcāra Critiques of the Two Truths.”  In Lin, Chen-kuo,  Michael Radich, eds. A Distant Mirror: Articulating Indic Ideas in Sixth and Seventh Century Chinese Buddhism. Hamburg:  Hamburg University Press. 313–335.

Yinshun  印順. 1972. “Lun Zhendi sanzang suochuan de amoluoshi 論真諦三藏所傳的阿摩羅識 (On the Doctrine of *Amalavijñāna, as Transmitted by Paramârtha) In Yi Fofa yanjiu Fofa 以佛法研究佛法 , Miao yin ji 妙音記 . Taibei:  Zhengwen chuban. vol. 3, part 4 269–300.

Yoshimura Makoto 吉村誠. 2002. “Shōron gakuha no shinshiki setsu ni tsuite 摂論学派の心識說について (On the Mind Doctrine of the Shelun School)Komazawa daigaku bukkyō gakubu ronshū 駒澤大学仏教学部論集  34 : 223–241.

----. 2007. “Shintai no amarashiki setsu to Shōron gakuha no kushiki setsu 真諦の阿摩羅識說と摂論学派の九識說 (The *Amalavijñāna Doctrine of Paramârtha and the Ninth Consciousnesses Doctrine of the Shelun School)Indogaku bukkyōgaku kenkyū 印度学仏教学研究  56 (1): 177–183.

Yoshizu Yoshihide 吉津宜英. 2003. “Shintai sanzō yakushutsu kyō ritsu ron kenkyū shi 眞諦三藏譯出經律論研究誌 .” Komazawa daigaku bukkyō gakubu kenkyū kiyō 駒澤大學佛教學部研究紀要  61 : 225–285.

deJong, J. W. 1986. “Review of Philosophy of Mind in Sixth Century China, by Diana Paul.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 9 (1): 129–133.

Ōtake Susumu 大竹晋. 2011. Hokke kyō ron, Muryōju kyō ron hoka 法華経論・無量寿経論他 . Tokyo:  Daizō shuppan. Shin kokuyaku daizōkyō新国訳大蔵経 : Yakkyō ron bu 訳経論部. 18,