James A. Benn notes that the Śūraṅgama also "shares some notable similarities with another scripture composed in China and dating to the same period", that is, the Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment. Indeed, Benn states that "One might regard the Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment, which has only one fascicle, as opposed to the Śūraṅgama's ten, as a precis of the essential points of the Śūraṅgama." Benn points out several passages which present uniquely Chinese understandings of animal life and natural phenomena that are without Indic precedent (such as the "Jelly fish with shrimp for eyes" and the "wasps, which take the larvae of other insects as their own") but that are found in earlier Chinese literature. James A. Benn also notes how the Śūraṅgama even borrows ideas that are mostly found in Taoist sources (such as the Baopuzi), such as the idea that there are ten types of "immortals" (仙 xiān) in a realm located between the deva realm and the human realm. The qualities of these immortals include common ideas found in Taoism, such as their "ingestion of metals and minerals" and the practice of "movement and stillness"(dongzhi, which is related to daoyin). Benn argues that the Śūraṅgama's "taxonomy" of immortals was "clearly derived" from Taoist literature. In a similar fashion, the Śūraṅgama's "ten types of demons" (鬼 gui), are also influenced by Taoist and Confucian sources. In favor of the sutra being based on Indian originals Ron Epstein gives an overview of the arguments for Indian or Chinese origin, and concludes: A number of scholars have associated the Śūraṅgama Sūtra with the Buddhist tradition at Nālandā. Epstein thinks that certain passages in the sutra do show Chinese influence, such as the section on the Taoist immortals, but he thinks that this "could easily represent an adaptive Chinese translation of Buddhist tantric ideas. The whole area of the doctrinal relationship between the Taoist nei-tan, or so-called "inner alchemy", and early Buddhist tantra is a murky one, and until we know more about both, the issue probably cannot be resolved adequately." Epstein further writes regarding uniquely Chinese influences found in the text: "As to things Chinese, there are various short references to them scattered throughout the text, but, just as well as indicating the work's Chinese origin, they also could be an indication of a translation style of substitution of parallel items, which would fit right in with the highly literary