Abstract

This article is part of a series on the Shorter Chinese Sa?yukta-?gama. Continuing the investigation from previous research on the provenance of the BZA, it is concluded that the attribution of the BZA to the K??yap?ya school is mistaken. A comparison of the BZA’s?akra-sa?yukta with the P?li Sakka-sa?yutta shows that, with minor exceptions, the narrative content of both sa?yuttas is identical though the number of suttas varies. Finally, the article completes the translation of the?akra-sa?yukta, the first part of which appeared in BSR 25.