Will the Real Buddha Please Stand Up?
http://www.buddhistgeeks.com/2012/05/bg ... -stand-up/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This topic is both interesting and disconcerting. Peacock reports the current scholarly view on what the oldest texts are, which include not only texts from the Sutta Nipata:John Peacock is a scholar and Associate Director of The Oxford Mindfulness Centre. His studies of the earliest Buddhist writings have revealed to him a very human Buddha and a very different Buddhism than we know today.
In a conversation with Hokai Sobol, Peacock describes the historical Buddha as a very practical teacher and a radical social reformer. He cites passages of the earliest writings that describe a very human and emotional Buddha that enjoyed satire. He calls the Buddha the “First Psychologist” and relates to him as a teacher who was more interested in practical psychology than philosophy.
This is Part 1 of a 2 part series.
- Snp 1.3 Khaggavisana Sutta: A Rhinoceros
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- MN 26: Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- Parayanavagga — The Chapter on the Way to the Far Shore
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... ml#vagga-5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=8302" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
As I said on that thread (summarising what I've read before from Peacock and other scholars, such as his series of talks here: http://www.audiodharma.org/teacher/207/):
Peacock restates this in the interview. In the earliest strata there is no organisation into noble truths, dependent origination, three characteristics, and so on.mikenz66 wrote:Certainly the answers to the Questions are very to the point, but it is interesting that the Buddist Dogma such as Anatta (mentioned in the previous Question), Noble truths (implied in this current Question by the talk of craving), mindfulness, and so on are not organised in to the categories that we are familiar with from other Suttas. This, along with the fact that these Suttas are referred to in other Nikayas (see link above and previous posts in this Forum), supports the claim that they are very early.
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f= ... 02#p130070" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Given that we find noble truths, dependent origination, and three characteristics in the various known Canons, the process of organising the Nikayas must have largely happened before the various sects separated.
But it seems that scholars such as Peacock are arguing the Buddha didn't teach those categories in the organised way as we now find in the Nikayas, in suttas such as:
SN 56.11 Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
SN 22.59 Anatta-lakkhana Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .nymo.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
SN 12.2 Paticca-samuppada-vibhanga Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Hmm, scary stuff... what to take as the word of the Buddha?
Mike