John Brough 布臘夫和 KR Norman 諾曼認為第三句「aviṣṭhitaḥ sa vrajati, Abbhuṭṭhito va sayati」本來的用字應該是「sa vayati 他(一直) 變動不停留」(「不停留 aviṣṭhita」)，但是，由於背誦(或書寫)過程的「錯位 metathesis」，造成「sa vayati 他變動」成為「va sayati 像躺下來」。於是改成「像雲生起一樣在胎中躺下來」。
另外漢譯的「識住母胎」與「gabbhe 子宮、母胎 vasati住 māṇavo 年輕人、幼兒」對應，漢譯可能是將「māṇavo 年輕人、幼兒」作「māṇa va」解釋，而成為「māṇa 心、識 va 像、如」，所以第一句出現「若如、譬如」的翻譯。
Norman, K. R., (1997), A Philological Approach to Buddhism，81-82頁。
John Brough compared a pāda in the Gāndhārī Dharmapada which ends in so vayadi "he goes" with the corresponding pāda in the Udāna-varga, which ends in sa vrajati, with the same meaning, and contrasted these forms with va sayati "he lies down" in the Pāli equivalent, and he pointed out that in the context the idea of moving is more likely to be correct than lying down. He explained the Pāli form as showing the metathesis of the two aksaras va and sa, and noted that although such a metathesis might occur in a purely oral tradition, it would imply "an unbelievably slipshod paramparā". In manuscript copying, however, this is a common and readily understandable error. The conclusion he anived at was that the text was already being transmitted by manuscript copying, and not exclusively by oral tradition, at a date earlier than the redaction of the Pāli version.