MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2597058454 · doi:10.1080/23729988.2017.1286888

Jōjin on the spot: some remarkable evidence of eleventh-century Chinese Buddhism from the<i>San Tendai Godaisan ki</i>

2016· article· en· W2597058454 on OpenAlexaff
George A. Keyworth

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Chinese Religions · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuddhismEleventhChinaHistoryAncient historyPeriod (music)LiteratureSpellClassicsReligious studiesPhilosophyArtTheologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jōjin (1011–1081), an eleventh-century Japanese pilgrim who chronicled his travels in Northern Song (960–1127) China, provides a significantly different perspective on Chinese Buddhist religion, rituals and politics than any continental account of the period. His diary, San Tendai Godaisan ki, provides not only invaluable information concerning significant differences between Chinese and Japanese Buddhist ritual practices but also evidence of a rare retranslation of one of the most important East Asian Buddhist spells – or dhāraṇī – which comes from an eighth-century Chinese apocryphon: the Hero’s March Spell (*Śūraṃgama-dhāraṇī, Lengyan zhou, Ryōgonshu). Jōjin’s diary is even more remarkable because it covers a period in China when textbooks, university courses on religion, and most scholars and practitioners today see the Chan ‘school’ (Zen) as ascendant. While Jōjin’s diary certainly mentions Chan teachings, masters, and texts, it is his attention to rituals and spells that deserves special consideration. Continental Buddhism beyond the narrow lens of the rise of the Chan tradition, with special attention to continued translation efforts at court in Kaifeng, makes the San Tendai Godaisan ki an invaluable resource for renewed study of continental East Asian Buddhism.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Chinese ReligionsSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207