判疑转确。三项今皆有据，逐一回验。（一）巴利学之盛·确：Luce《Old Burma – Early Pagan》第一卷（书目 0361，）書 85 作"a cunning patchwork of lines taken passim from the Tipiṭaka, which probably indicates the already high level of Pali scholarship at Pagān"。（二）阿毗达磨之业·确：同书書 72 作"The best painters were covering acres of walls in temples with illustrations of the whole Tipiṭaka, Vinaya, Suttanta, Abhidhamma"，其注一七九指敏迦巴古标基寺内廊；
核查全文
書 77 另有"If he stresses the Abhidhamma, it is just the external details, not the philosophy"一语，见其用力不匀。（三）专学之系年·确：至于强烈的阿毗达磨专学，通说系于十七世纪以降"，回验 Braun（书目 0499）書 63作"most scholars point to the seventeenth century as the time when a pronounced stress on Abhidhamma studies began in Burma"。订前记一处页次：前记第（二）项系于書 77，实为書 72（書 77 所载是上引external details 一句）；脚注 所记 72、77 两页不误，误在据栏，今订。正文、注皆不须再动。
逐项核毕： ①戒统断绝：书内明记1697年阿拉干僧团授戒之后「no upasampadā ceremonies were held after 1697. With the demise of these bhikkhus, therefore, it again became impossible for a sāmaṇera to receive higher ordination…Those who did join the order did so without the necessary rites of passage and thus belonged to the category of gaṇinnānses」，即十八世纪前期岛上已无如法受具之比丘，只余未受具的 gaṇinnānse——与正文「几近断绝、已无足够数量的具足戒比丘共举羯磨」相合。
核查全文
②1753年暹罗僧团抵锡与重授：「Finally, however, they arrived in 1753」，并引荷兰总督 Loten 回忆录「in the year 1753…the long desired arrival of the priests of the Buddhist doctrine from Siam who arrived safely on the 5th of May…at Trincomalee」；抵康提后「at a newly consecrated sīmā, they performed their first upasampadā ceremony on the full-moon day of Āsāḷha (June–July) 1753」，其后于 Asgiri Vihare 另立第二界坛，并续为沙弥授具，如法比丘遂渐增。 ③暹罗派之名：须注意此名是1803年回溯而起的——书中作「The new fraternity which thus began came to be known as the Amarapura Nikaya, and was distinguished from the Kandyan establishment, which, because of its original connection with Siam, henceforth came to be known as the Siyam Nikaya」，即缅甸系阿摩罗补罗派成立后，为与之区别，旧有康提僧团才被称作暹罗派。正文「1753年…建立了…暹罗派」作为戒统源头之说不误，惟严格说1753年立的是戒统与界坛，「暹罗派」之名后起，落实时宜分别措辞。 本行另提「斯里兰卡与暹罗使团档案及1753年复戒史料」，Malalgoda 书中已详引三次赴暹使团的两种当事人记录（Allepola Mohotṭāla《Syāma Varṇanāva》与 Wilbigedara Muhandiram《Syāmadūta Varṇanāva》，均有英译）及英译本 Goonetileke《Syāmopasampadā》，使团程序一节据此可核，不必另取档案原件。判语改「确」。
[0633] The Path of Purification - Buddhaghosa (Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli trans.) - 2010
书页
書 36（版心页 36，导论首段）
核查结论
本面覆看正文書 111 行，今作「以巴利三藏为正典，觉音注释传统（尤其《清净道论》）在各地皆具高度权威，惟各地课程与修行传统不尽相同」，与甲案所拟逐字相符，全称之「都」已去。書 37 复谓巴利文之中兴 developed in several centres in the South Indian mainland and spread to Burma，可担「传布及于各地」。而各国课程之异同，仍无普查之本，正文今已自陈「不尽相同」，不逾所据。判疑→确，处置待裁→已改。
按
正文書 111 行首项（同段并作 The Visuddhimagga…systematically summarizes and interprets the teaching of the Buddha contained in the Pali Tipiṭaka。要在其措辞系于上座部全体而不系于某一国，故可担收窄後之语而不可担原有之全称「都」。該本±0，以 書 36／37 两面版心复验。
[0633] The Path of Purification - Buddhaghosa (Bhikkhu Ñāṇamoli trans.) - 2010
书页
書 37（版心页 37）
核查结论
本面覆看正文書 111 行，今作「以巴利三藏为正典，觉音注释传统（尤其《清净道论》）在各地皆具高度权威，惟各地课程与修行传统不尽相同」，与甲案所拟逐字相符，全称之「都」已去。書 37 复谓巴利文之中兴 developed in several centres in the South Indian mainland and spread to Burma，可担「传布及于各地」。而各国课程之异同，仍无普查之本，正文今已自陈「不尽相同」，不逾所据。判疑→确，处置待裁→已改。
著录与括注俱实。（一）版本项对：SUNY 五见、State University of New York 十八见；封底自述「Expanded and updated, the second edition offers this wide-ranging account for readers at the beginning of the twenty-first century」，并记初版为 1995 年，「Theravāda homelands since the work's publication in 1995」。书目行「2nd ed. Albany: SUNY Press, 2010」无误。
核查全文
（二）「东南亚上座部整体概论」对：Theravada 二百四十一见；封底作「Swearer shows Theravāda Buddhism in Southeast Asia to be a dynamic, complex system of thought and practice embedded in the [其社会脉络]」。（三）「各国共性与差异的综合处理」亦对，覆盖面可具数：Thailand 三百六十九见、Sri Lanka 一百四十七见、Burma 九十七见、Cambodia 八十五见、Laos 七十一见、Vietnam 二十见。兼及斯里兰卡一层可留意：该书虽以东南亚为题，实以锡兰为其源流之一并论，故正文若以之为「东南亚」之据而不及锡兰，尚不失；若要论锡兰本身，此书亦可用。
Harris《Cambodian Buddhism: History and Practice》（Hawai'i, 2005），三项俱有据。（一）阇耶跋摩七世的大乘身份，坐实：该书导论自述第一章「concludes by looking at the manner in which Buddhism participated in the life of the state, with special emphasis on the dominant role of tantric Mahayana concepts and rituals under Jayavarman VII (r. 1181–c. 1220)」。
核查全文
Jayavarman VII 三十七见、Mahayana 四十三见、Bayon 十三见、Angkor 二百八十见，建筑一侧材料亦厚。（二）上座部转型，坐实：第二章标目即〈The Middle Period and the Emergence of the Theravada〉，导论谓其「consideration of the factors that led to the emergence of a distinctively Theravada form of Buddhism in Cambodia following the collapse of Angkorian power」，并处理上座部究系草根传统抑或另一套以宫廷为据点的精英体系这一问题。Theravada 一百四十二见。（三）1431 年之影响，有正面表述：「The last inscription in Sanskrit at Angkor dates from 1327, and Mahayana Buddhism itself largely disappeared after the fall of Angkor in 1431.」1431 凡四见。脚注括注「吴哥时代宗教格局与上座部转换的权威研究」名实相符。更奇者，Ś 被识成数字 9——Śrāvakayāna 作「9ràvakayàna」；ā 又时或作 à（Dvàravatì）。凡检此本，长音符与 Ś 皆不可用标准转写。
逐项核毕： ①戒统断绝：书内明记1697年阿拉干僧团授戒之后「no upasampadā ceremonies were held after 1697. With the demise of these bhikkhus, therefore, it again became impossible for a sāmaṇera to receive higher ordination…Those who did join the order did so without the necessary rites of passage and thus belonged to the category of gaṇinnānses」，即十八世纪前期岛上已无如法受具之比丘，只余未受具的 gaṇinnānse——与正文「几近断绝、已无足够数量的具足戒比丘共举羯磨」相合。
核查全文
②1753年暹罗僧团抵锡与重授：「Finally, however, they arrived in 1753」，并引荷兰总督 Loten 回忆录「in the year 1753…the long desired arrival of the priests of the Buddhist doctrine from Siam who arrived safely on the 5th of May…at Trincomalee」；抵康提后「at a newly consecrated sīmā, they performed their first upasampadā ceremony on the full-moon day of Āsāḷha (June–July) 1753」，其后于 Asgiri Vihare 另立第二界坛，并续为沙弥授具，如法比丘遂渐增。 ③暹罗派之名：须注意此名是1803年回溯而起的——书中作「The new fraternity which thus began came to be known as the Amarapura Nikaya, and was distinguished from the Kandyan establishment, which, because of its original connection with Siam, henceforth came to be known as the Siyam Nikaya」，即缅甸系阿摩罗补罗派成立后，为与之区别，旧有康提僧团才被称作暹罗派。正文「1753年…建立了…暹罗派」作为戒统源头之说不误，惟严格说1753年立的是戒统与界坛，「暹罗派」之名后起，落实时宜分别措辞。 判语改「确」。
