original buddhism

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and texts.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 10947
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact:

original buddhism

Post by DNS » Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:59 am

As a follow-up to my recent DhammaWiki article on Pudgalavada (and topic here), I made this analysis / interpretation of original Buddhism. I'm sure it will have some detractors from both hard-core Theravadins and hard-core Mahayanists, but that's okay:

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title= ... l_Buddhism

As I note at the top of the article:
(This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)

Perhaps it's not about Theravada vs. Mahayana, but rather some blend of the early schools . . .

ieee23
Posts: 323
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 12:40 am

Re: original buddhism

Post by ieee23 » Thu Jun 29, 2017 11:11 am

An Anthology published as a book of Early Buddhist suttas would be a very interesting book. The suttas where there is disagreement about whether or not they are Early Buddhist could be in a special section of the book. Does such a book exist?

If not, I think there is a place and a market for it.
Whatever a bhikkhu frequently thinks and ponders upon, that will become the inclination of his mind. - MN 19

User avatar
Lazy_eye
Posts: 996
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:23 pm
Location: Laurel, MD
Contact:

Re: original buddhism

Post by Lazy_eye » Thu Jun 29, 2017 1:15 pm

David N. Snyder wrote:As a follow-up to my recent DhammaWiki article on Pudgalavada (and topic here), I made this analysis / interpretation of original Buddhism. I'm sure it will have some detractors from both hard-core Theravadins and hard-core Mahayanists, but that's okay:

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title= ... l_Buddhism

As I note at the top of the article:
(This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)

Perhaps it's not about Theravada vs. Mahayana, but rather some blend of the early schools . . .
David,

I really appreciate having this resource available, along with the other Wikis you have put together (on the various interpretations of nibbana, for example). It's great to have all this information summarized in one place.

Question I was wondering about: unless maybe I missed it, I don't see any mention of "emptiness." Obviously that's fairly central to Mahayana, but there's evidence that it features in early Buddhism as well. The Saṃyuktāgama has this text, for instance, so if we accept the āgamas as Buddhavacana, then we'd need to consider emptiness as presented here. Plus there are emptiness suttas in the Pali Canon, e.g. here and here.

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 10947
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact:

Re: original buddhism

Post by DNS » Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:32 pm

Lazy_eye wrote: I really appreciate having this resource available, along with the other Wikis you have put together (on the various interpretations of nibbana, for example). It's great to have all this information summarized in one place.
Thanks.

:anjali:
Question I was wondering about: unless maybe I missed it, I don't see any mention of "emptiness." Obviously that's fairly central to Mahayana, but there's evidence that it features in early Buddhism as well. The Saṃyuktāgama has this text, for instance, so if we accept the āgamas as Buddhavacana, then we'd need to consider emptiness as presented here. Plus there are emptiness suttas in the Pali Canon, e.g. here and here.
Thanks for that feedback. I wanted to keep the article short and sweet, but when I expand it, that's a good idea for another inclusion. :thumbsup:

User avatar
BasementBuddhist
Posts: 265
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 1:03 pm

Re: original buddhism

Post by BasementBuddhist » Thu Jun 29, 2017 4:15 pm

Thank you for the article! It will be very useful in focusing my reading of the Nikayas. :anjali:

thomaslaw
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: original buddhism

Post by thomaslaw » Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:09 am

David N. Snyder wrote:As a follow-up to my recent DhammaWiki article on Pudgalavada (and topic here), I made this analysis / interpretation of original Buddhism. I'm sure it will have some detractors from both hard-core Theravadins and hard-core Mahayanists, but that's okay:

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title= ... l_Buddhism

As I note at the top of the article:
(This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)

Perhaps it's not about Theravada vs. Mahayana, but rather some blend of the early schools . . .
Dear David,

The most fundamental teachings/dhammas of Early Buddhism (pre-sectarian Buddhism) are found in the so-called 'sutra/sutta-anga' portion of the Samyukta-agama/Samyutta-nikaya, according to the scholar monk Yinshun (See CHOONG Mun-keat, 2000, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 7-11; and, 2010, 'Problems and Prospects of the Chinese Samyukta-agama: Its Structure and Content', in Translating Buddhist Chinese (ed. by Konrad Meisig), pp. 53-64. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.

Regards,

Thomas

nichiren-123
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:24 am

Re: original buddhism

Post by nichiren-123 » Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:21 am

thomaslaw wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote:As a follow-up to my recent DhammaWiki article on Pudgalavada (and topic here), I made this analysis / interpretation of original Buddhism. I'm sure it will have some detractors from both hard-core Theravadins and hard-core Mahayanists, but that's okay:

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title= ... l_Buddhism

As I note at the top of the article:
(This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)

Perhaps it's not about Theravada vs. Mahayana, but rather some blend of the early schools . . .
Dear David,

The most fundamental teachings/dhammas of Early Buddhism (pre-sectarian Buddhism) are found in the so-called 'sutra/sutta-anga' portion of the Samyukta-agama/Samyutta-nikaya, according to the scholar monk Yinshun (See CHOONG Mun-keat, 2000, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 7-11; and, 2010, 'Problems and Prospects of the Chinese Samyukta-agama: Its Structure and Content', in Translating Buddhist Chinese (ed. by Konrad Meisig), pp. 53-64. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.

Regards,

Thomas
Can you link me to the portion of the samyutta nikaya you are talking about?

thanks
ben

thomaslaw
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: original buddhism

Post by thomaslaw » Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:51 pm

nichiren-123 wrote:
thomaslaw wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote:As a follow-up to my recent DhammaWiki article on Pudgalavada (and topic here), I made this analysis / interpretation of original Buddhism. I'm sure it will have some detractors from both hard-core Theravadins and hard-core Mahayanists, but that's okay:

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title= ... l_Buddhism

As I note at the top of the article:
(This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)

Perhaps it's not about Theravada vs. Mahayana, but rather some blend of the early schools . . .
Dear David,

The most fundamental teachings/dhammas of Early Buddhism (pre-sectarian Buddhism) are found in the so-called 'sutra/sutta-anga' portion of the Samyukta-agama/Samyutta-nikaya, according to the scholar monk Yinshun (See CHOONG Mun-keat, 2000, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 7-11; and, 2010, 'Problems and Prospects of the Chinese Samyukta-agama: Its Structure and Content', in Translating Buddhist Chinese (ed. by Konrad Meisig), pp. 53-64. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.

Regards,

Thomas
Can you link me to the portion of the samyutta nikaya you are talking about?

thanks
ben
You can find the sources (the book and the article) in the following website:

https://www.harrassowitz-verlag.de/sear ... 20Mun-keat

Regards,

Thomas

ToVincent
Posts: 398
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: original buddhism

Post by ToVincent » Fri Jul 07, 2017 10:20 pm

nichiren-123 wrote:.....
Sūtra Aṅga
________________________


Nidāna Vagga:
--------------
SN 12, 14

Khandha Vagga:
---------------
SN 22

Saḷāyatana Vagga:
------------------
SN 35, 36

Mahā Vagga:
------------
SN 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 54, 55, 56

__________


Also SN 41, SN 24, SN 44, SN 34 are interesting.

Metta.
In this world with its ..., Māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

thomaslaw
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: original buddhism

Post by thomaslaw » Tue Jul 11, 2017 12:55 am

> ToVincent:

Also SN 41, SN 24, SN 44, SN 34 are interesting.
--

These samyuttas belong to the Veyyakarana Anga (Tathagata section) (see pp. 248-251 in Choong Mun-keat's The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism).

Thomas

ToVincent
Posts: 398
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: original buddhism

Post by ToVincent » Tue Jul 11, 2017 11:00 pm

thomaslaw wrote:> ToVincent:

Also SN 41, SN 24, SN 44, SN 34 are interesting.
--

These samyuttas belong to the Veyyakarana Anga (Tathagata section) (see pp. 248-251 in Choong Mun-keat's The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism).

Thomas
I understand.

I meant to say that apart from the Sūtra Aṅga - & as far as the "most fundamental teachings/dhammas of Early Buddhism" is concerned - SN 41 (Citta-samyutta), SN 24 (Ditthi-samyutta), SN 44 (Avyakata-samyutta), SN 34 Samādhi-Samyutta) are ALSO interesting.

For what I can remember of my reading of Choong Mun-keat, he praised the following:
SN 12 Nidāna Saṃyutta
SN 22 Khandha Saṃyutta
SN 35 Saḷāyatana Saṃyutta
SN 45 Magga Saṃyutta

And I would add that the following are the pieces of choice; if to start with (all with parallels).
sn12.39
sn12.65
sn22.33
sn22.47
sn22.81
sn22.89
sn22.95 (if well interpreted)
sn35.95
sn35.102
sn35.238 ++++
sn35.241
sn35.245 ++++
sn35.246 ++++
sn45.2 +++++


ALSO (all with parallels)
-----------------
sn36.11
sn36.31
sn41.6
sn42.8 +++
sn45.4
sn46.2 +++
sn46.53
sn46.54 +++
sn47.8 ++++
sn47.19
sn47.42 ++++
sn48.8 ++++

This visual aid might help some (https://justpaste.it/1695d)
Note on this sketch, ThomasLaw, that Choong did help me resolve a great conundrum.
Check out the view of the Sarvastivadan in SN 298 and the one of the Theravadan in its SN 12.2 parallel.
The components of namārūpa nidāna are not the same as the components of nāmarūpa, "inherited", so to speak, and operative in saḷāyatana.
Neither school was wrong. They were just talking from a different point of view. And it makes a huge difference.
Thanks Choong!
-----

And that is just for the SN.
AN has some great gems too. And MN a few ones.

Metta & good read Nichiren (and you too ThomasLaw).


P.S.
Note that the 4 ++++ are Major suttas. Major.

I just love Choong Mun-Keat. Too bad he did not continue his great work on parallels in the Nikayas.
This is exactly the kind of method that should be applied to the studies of parallels. Great scholar - clean act - very underrated. Now gone into the "Establishment" world. Useless studies. Too bad.
In this world with its ..., Māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

thomaslaw
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: original buddhism

Post by thomaslaw » Thu Jul 13, 2017 1:12 am

>>ToVincent: ... For what I can remember of my reading of Choong Mun-keat, he praised the following:
SN 12 Nidāna Saṃyutta
SN 22 Khandha Saṃyutta
SN 35 Saḷāyatana Saṃyutta
SN 45 Magga Saṃyutta

Thomas: I think in the book he focused 'all' samyutta/samyuktas of the 'Sutra anga' portion of SN and SA, in order to clarify the similarities and differences between the two texts.
---

>>ToVincent: ... This visual aid might help some (https://justpaste.it/1695d)
Note on this sketch, ThomasLaw, that Choong did help me resolve a great conundrum.
Check out the view of the Sarvastivadan in SN 298 and the one of the Theravadan in its SN 12.2 parallel.
The components of namārūpa nidāna are not the same as the components of nāmarūpa, "inherited", so to speak, and operative in saḷāyatana.
Neither school was wrong. They were just talking from a different point of view. And it makes a huge difference.
Thanks Choong!

Thomas: Why 'it makes a huge difference'?
---

>>ToVincent: I just love Choong Mun-Keat. Too bad he did not continue his great work on parallels in the Nikayas.
This is exactly the kind of method that should be applied to the studies of parallels. Great scholar - clean act - very underrated. Now gone into the "Establishment" world. Useless studies. Too bad.

Thomas: Well, we may try our best to promote his comparative studies to become more useful but not useless studies.

I think he did continue his great work on parallels in Nikayas/Agamas, particularly on samyukta/samyuttas:

Choong Mun-keat. 2012. ‘A comparison of the Chinese and Pāli versions of the Bala Saṃyukta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on “Powers” (Bala)’. Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies 2: 84-103.

The following articles relevant to particular saṃyukta/saṃyuttas of the geya-aṅga portion of SA/SN:

2006. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Kosala Saṃyutta, an early Buddhist discourse on King Pasenadi of Kosala’. The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies 7: 21-35.

2006. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Bhikkhu Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on monks’. Buddhist Studies Review 23 (1): 61-70.

2007. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Vaṅgīsa-thera Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on the Venerable Vaṅgīsa’. Buddhist Studies Review 24 (1): 35-45.

2009. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Brāhmaṇa Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on the priestly Brāhmaṇas’. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 19 (3): 371-382.

2009. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Māra Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on Māra, the Evil One’. The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies 10: 35-53.

2011. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Devatā Saṃyutta and Devaputta Saṃyutta, collections of early Buddhist discourses on devatas “gods” and devaputras “sons of gods”’. Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies 1: 60-88.

2012. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Sakka Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on ‘Śakra, rules of the gods’’. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 22 (3-4): 561-574.

2014. ‘A Comparison of the Pāli and Chinese Versions of the Brahmā Saṃyutta, a Collection of Early Buddhist Discourses on Brahmās, the Exalted Gods’. Buddhist Studies Review 31 (2): 179-194.

The following articles relevant to particular saṃyukta/saṃyuttas of the vyākaraṇa-aṅga portion of SA/SN:

2014. ‘A Comparison of the Pāli and Chinese Versions of the Gāmaṇi Samyutta, a Collection of Early Buddhist Discourses to Headmen’. Journal of Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies 7: 98-115.

2016. ‘A comparison of the Chinese and Pāli versions of the Śāriputra Saṃyukta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on the Venerable Śāriputra’. Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies 10: 27-52.

2017. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Kassapa Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on the Venerable Kāśyapa’. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 27 (2): 295-311.

Regards,

Thomas
Last edited by thomaslaw on Wed Aug 16, 2017 12:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

ToVincent
Posts: 398
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: original buddhism

Post by ToVincent » Thu Jul 13, 2017 2:06 pm

thomaslaw wrote:......
As Choong said himself about the Vyākarana & Geya aṅgas: "limited doctrinal content".

What could explain such an unavailing endeavour? Maybe the suttas listed below?:

::::::::::::::::::::::::
Geya-aṅga
::::::::::::::::::::::::

(2006) Kosala Saṃyutta (SN 3) - sn3.2 - sn3.15 - sn3.17 - sn3.18
(2006) Bhikkhu Saṃyutta (SN 21) - sn21.8
(2007) Vaṅgīsa-thera Saṃyutta (SN 8)
(2009) Māra Saṃyutta (SN 4) - sn4.15 - sn4.16 - sn4.23
(2009) Brāhmaṇa Saṃyutta (SN 7) - sn7.2
(2011) Devatā Saṃyutta and Devaputta Saṃyutta (SN 1 & 2) - sn1.20 - sn1.25 - sn1.27 - sn1.31 - sn1.61 - sn1.62 - sn1.64
(2012) Sakka Saṃyutta (SN 11)
(2014) Brahmā Saṃyutta (SN 6) - sn 6.15

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Vyākaraṇa-aṅga portion of SA/SN:
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
(2017) Kassapa Saṃyutta (SN 16) - sn16.5 - sn16.8 - sn16.9
(2016) Śāriputra Saṃyukta (SN 28)
(2014) Gāmaṇi Samyutta (SN 42) - sn 42.8

I am not criticising his studies. They will be useful for scholarship at large.
I am just wondering why he is not working more on the Sutra-aṅga, or on other more interesting Samyuttas.


-----------


May I add the following two sutras' translations in his work on "Emptiness & the middle way" in 2004.

AN 4.173/4 - SA 249 - koṭṭhita - Existence. Non existence.
MN 151 - SA 236 - Emptiness concentration. +

On top of his translations (in this book) of:
SN 12.15 - SA 301 - World's duality
SN 12.20 - SA 296 - Conditioned
SN 12.35/36 - SA 297 - Idem - Emptiness of Dhammas
SN 12.46 - SA 300 - One acts, one experiences
SN 12.65 - SA 287 - Consciousness turns back @ nāmarūpa
SN 22.90 - SA 262 - Middle way
SN 35.85 - SA 232 - Empty world
that were already partially covered in his "Fundamental teachings of early-Buddhism".

Thanks for the references.
Metta
In this world with its ..., Māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

User avatar
budo
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 12:16 am
Location: Canada

Re: original buddhism

Post by budo » Thu Jul 13, 2017 10:50 pm

I would be interested in finding a chronology of the suttas by date of 1) they were written and 2) by order they took place. I can see in some suttas the Buddha is referred to as Gotama (such as the suttas on the brahma viharas), and others where he is referred to as "Lord", which would help indicate some chronology in terms of when the events took place, not necessarily of when they were written.
Energy flows where attention goes

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 10947
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact:

Re: original buddhism

Post by DNS » Thu Jul 13, 2017 11:05 pm

The Life of the Buddha by Bhikkhu Nanamoli does that, places the life of the Buddha from the Suttas in chronological order. As far as when they were written, that would be meaningless, I believe since the whole Tipitaka was put to writing around 100 BCE. However, there are EBT scholars who demonstrate which suttas are older than others (from the oral transmission period of the teachings). Bhante Sujato and Bhante Brahmali have done one such study with their The Authenticity of Early Buddhist Texts (Buddhist Publication Society, 2014).

Both books mentioned above are available online as a pdf.

From a suttacentral thread, here is the tldr conclusion of The Authenticity of Early Buddhist Texts
Bhante Sujato wrote:As per our book, The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts, we believe that most of the texts included in what we call the early Buddhist Texts (EBTs) can be regarded as authentic. These texts are:

1. The 4 main nikayas in Pali
2. The six early books of the Khuddaka (Dhammapada, Udāna, Itivuttaka, Thera- and Therīgāthā, and Sutta Nipāta)
3. The Vinaya (especially the patimokkha and portions of the Khandhakas; but excluding the Parivāra, a later addition)
4. Such parallels to these texts as are found in Chinese, Sanskrit, Tibetan, etc.

All other Buddhist texts are later, and where they contain genuine words of the Buddha, these are quotes from the EBTs. In saying that these later texts are inauthentic, we are merely acknowledging the historical facts of their provenance. Whether such texts are true or beneficial expressions of the Dhamma is an entirely different matter.

User avatar
Lucas Oliveira
Posts: 517
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: original buddhism

Post by Lucas Oliveira » Fri Jul 14, 2017 12:19 am

David N. Snyder wrote:The Life of the Buddha by Bhikkhu Nanamoli does that, places the life of the Buddha from the Suttas in chronological order. As far as when they were written, that would be meaningless, I believe since the whole Tipitaka was put to writing around 100 BCE. However, there are EBT scholars who demonstrate which suttas are older than others (from the oral transmission period of the teachings). Bhante Sujato and Bhante Brahmali have done one such study with their The Authenticity of Early Buddhist Texts (Buddhist Publication Society, 2014).

Both books mentioned above are available online as a pdf.

From a suttacentral thread, here is the tldr conclusion of The Authenticity of Early Buddhist Texts
Bhante Sujato wrote:As per our book, The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts, we believe that most of the texts included in what we call the early Buddhist Texts (EBTs) can be regarded as authentic. These texts are:

1. The 4 main nikayas in Pali
2. The six early books of the Khuddaka (Dhammapada, Udāna, Itivuttaka, Thera- and Therīgāthā, and Sutta Nipāta)
3. The Vinaya (especially the patimokkha and portions of the Khandhakas; but excluding the Parivāra, a later addition)
4. Such parallels to these texts as are found in Chinese, Sanskrit, Tibetan, etc.

All other Buddhist texts are later, and where they contain genuine words of the Buddha, these are quotes from the EBTs. In saying that these later texts are inauthentic, we are merely acknowledging the historical facts of their provenance. Whether such texts are true or beneficial expressions of the Dhamma is an entirely different matter.
:goodpost:

:anjali:
I participate in this forum using Google Translator. http://translate.google.com.br

http://www.acessoaoinsight.net/

thomaslaw
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: original buddhism

Post by thomaslaw » Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:30 am

Lucas Oliveira wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote:The Life of the Buddha by Bhikkhu Nanamoli does that, places the life of the Buddha from the Suttas in chronological order. As far as when they were written, that would be meaningless, I believe since the whole Tipitaka was put to writing around 100 BCE. However, there are EBT scholars who demonstrate which suttas are older than others (from the oral transmission period of the teachings). Bhante Sujato and Bhante Brahmali have done one such study with their The Authenticity of Early Buddhist Texts (Buddhist Publication Society, 2014).

Both books mentioned above are available online as a pdf.

From a suttacentral thread, here is the tldr conclusion of The Authenticity of Early Buddhist Texts
Bhante Sujato wrote:As per our book, The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts, we believe that most of the texts included in what we call the early Buddhist Texts (EBTs) can be regarded as authentic. These texts are:

1. The 4 main nikayas in Pali
2. The six early books of the Khuddaka (Dhammapada, Udāna, Itivuttaka, Thera- and Therīgāthā, and Sutta Nipāta)
3. The Vinaya (especially the patimokkha and portions of the Khandhakas; but excluding the Parivāra, a later addition)
4. Such parallels to these texts as are found in Chinese, Sanskrit, Tibetan, etc.

All other Buddhist texts are later, and where they contain genuine words of the Buddha, these are quotes from the EBTs. In saying that these later texts are inauthentic, we are merely acknowledging the historical facts of their provenance. Whether such texts are true or beneficial expressions of the Dhamma is an entirely different matter.
:goodpost:

:anjali:
Regarding the 4 main nikayas/agamas, according to Yinshun, SA/SN originated at the first council; MA/MN, DA/DN and EA/AN originated at the second council (p. 11, nn. 36, 37, in Choong Mun-keat's The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism).

Regards,

Thomas

ToVincent
Posts: 398
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: original buddhism

Post by ToVincent » Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:46 pm

budo wrote:I would be interested in finding a chronology of the suttas
Go with the BORI. At least we have (Indian) people there, who really know the languages, the history, the narrative behind Buddhism, etc. In other words, quite acquainted with Indian philosophy at large.
These people went with the flow (Vedism > Buddhism). Not backward (Buddhism > Vedism).
Major difference.
No affected rookies there. Just a bit jingoistic (sometimes) :)
In this world with its ..., Māras, ... in this population with its ascetics.... (AN 5.30).
------
We are all possessed - more or less.
------
And what, bhikkhu, is inward rottenness? Here someone is immoral, one of evil character, of impure and suspect behaviour, secretive in his acts, no ascetic though claiming to be one, not a celibate though claiming to be one, inwardly rotten, corrupt, depraved. This is called inward rottenness.”
SN 35.241
------
https://justpaste.it/j5o4

thomaslaw
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: original buddhism

Post by thomaslaw » Sat Jul 15, 2017 2:47 am

ToVincent wrote:
... I am just wondering why he is not working more on the Sutra-aṅga, or on other more interesting Samyuttas.
I am just wondering what are other more interesting Samyuttas, and why?

Thomas

thomaslaw
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: original buddhism

Post by thomaslaw » Thu Sep 14, 2017 5:05 am

thomaslaw wrote:
I think he did continue his great work on parallels in Nikayas/Agamas, particularly on samyukta/samyuttas:

Choong Mun-keat. 2012. ‘A comparison of the Chinese and Pāli versions of the Bala Saṃyukta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on “Powers” (Bala)’. Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies 2: 84-103.

The following articles relevant to particular saṃyukta/saṃyuttas of the geya-aṅga portion of SA/SN:

2006. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Kosala Saṃyutta, an early Buddhist discourse on King Pasenadi of Kosala’. The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies 7: 21-35.

2006. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Bhikkhu Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on monks’. Buddhist Studies Review 23 (1): 61-70.

2007. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Vaṅgīsa-thera Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on the Venerable Vaṅgīsa’. Buddhist Studies Review 24 (1): 35-45.

2009. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Brāhmaṇa Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on the priestly Brāhmaṇas’. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 19 (3): 371-382.

2009. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Māra Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on Māra, the Evil One’. The Indian International Journal of Buddhist Studies 10: 35-53.

2011. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Devatā Saṃyutta and Devaputta Saṃyutta, collections of early Buddhist discourses on devatas “gods” and devaputras “sons of gods”’. Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies 1: 60-88.

2012. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Sakka Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on ‘Śakra, rules of the gods’’. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 22 (3-4): 561-574.

2014. ‘A Comparison of the Pāli and Chinese Versions of the Brahmā Saṃyutta, a Collection of Early Buddhist Discourses on Brahmās, the Exalted Gods’. Buddhist Studies Review 31 (2): 179-194.

The following articles relevant to particular saṃyukta/saṃyuttas of the vyākaraṇa-aṅga portion of SA/SN:

2014. ‘A Comparison of the Pāli and Chinese Versions of the Gāmaṇi Samyutta, a Collection of Early Buddhist Discourses to Headmen’. Journal of Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies 7: 98-115.

2016. ‘A comparison of the Chinese and Pāli versions of the Śāriputra Saṃyukta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on the Venerable Śāriputra’. Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies 10: 27-52.

2017. ‘A comparison of the Pāli and Chinese versions of the Kassapa Saṃyutta, a collection of early Buddhist discourses on the Venerable Kāśyapa’. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 27 (2): 295-311.

Regards,

Thomas
Another article relevant to the vyākaraṇa-aṅga portion of SA/SN is recently published by Mun-keat Choong in Buddhist Studies Review:

2017. "A comparison of the Chinese and Pāli Saṃyukta/Saṃyuttas on the Venerable Mahā-Maudgalyāyana (Mahā-Moggallāna)"
https://journals.equinoxpub.com/index.p ... ue/current

Thomas

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Nicolas and 7 guests