Ten Newly Identified Fragments of the Sanskrit <em>Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra</em> (SI 6780) in the Serindia Collection (IOM, RAS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper deals with ten previously unpublished Sanskrit fragments that have been identified with the Buddhist text of the Mahāyāna tradition Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtra, or Lotus Sūtra. These fragments have had no call numbers until recently and were found among the non-inventoried materials of the Serindia Collection (IOM, RAS), which were set aside for restoration. The fragments are written in the South Turkestan Brāhmī type of script, which was in use for recording Sanskrit texts in the Southern Serindia in the 89 centuries A.D., primarily in Khotan, one of the largest Buddhist centers in Central Asia in the 1st millennium A.D. The largest part of Sanskrit texts in the Serindia Collection is presented by the manuscripts from Khotan, which, according to contents, reflect the popularity of Mahāyāna texts in the Southern Serindia, with the Lotus Sūtra texts in Sanskrit being especially popular, numbering over 30 storage units. The fragments under study, which are currently stored in the Serindia Collection under the call number SI 6780, contain extracts from three chapters of the Lotus Sūtra: Chapter XVIII (Anumodanāpuṇyanirdeśa-parivartaḥ The Chapter Describing the Religious Merit [Obtained through] Joyful Participation [in Dharma]), Chapter XIX (Dharmabhāṇakānṛśaṃsa-parivartaḥ Benefits of a Dharma Preacher) and Chapter XX (Sadāparibhūta-parivartaḥ [Bodhisattva] Sadāparibhūta). This paper includes a description of the fragments, their transliteration and comparison with two currently known Sanskrit Lotus Sūtra versions, as well as a Russian translation, and a facsimile.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".