Ok, I have read the Gregory Schopen article in the Encyclopedia of Buddhism, downloaded Frauwallner, and started on Shayne Clarke.
As some may be familiar I have a genuine aversion, perhpas even a learning deficit, when it comes to understanding grammer and learning languages, so I have developed a “blunt instrument” approach to studying Buddhist texts in Pali that simply involves cuting and pasting strings of letters from suttacentral into digital pali reader and observing the patterns of numerical patterns across the books.
It is a “well known truth” that the patimokkha is the oldest part of the Vinaya and so I wanted to start to identify the connections between this text and the suttas that remain my primary interest, mostly as a way to take a break from trying to learn Pali prosody, yet another topic that is intensely difficult for me.
So, as usual my abbreviations are VN for Vinaya, DN, MN etc, AB of Abhidhamma.
Tatrime cattāro pārājikā dhammā uddesaṁ āgacchanti.
These four rules on expulsion come up for recitation.
pārājikā
VN: 86
DN: 0
MN: 0
SN: 0
AN: 0
plus one occurrence in the Jataka.
Yo pana bhikkhu bhikkhūnaṁ sikkhāsājīvasamāpanno sikkhaṁ appaccakkhāya dubbalyaṁ anāvikatvā methunaṁ dhammaṁ paṭiseveyya, antamaso tiracchānagatāyapi, pārājiko hoti asaṁvāso.
If a monk, after taking on the monks’ training and way of life, without first renouncing the training and revealing his weakness, has sexual intercourse, even with a female animal, he is expelled and excluded from the community.
sikkhāsājīvasamāpanno
VN: 1
DN: 0
MN: 6 (MN27 MN38 MN51 MN94 MN101 MN112)
SN: 0
AN: 2 (AN4.198 AN10.99)
KN: 0
appaccakkhāya
VN:1
DN: 0
MN: 0
SN: 0
AN: 0
KN: 2 (Mil)
dubbalyaṁ
VN: 5
DN: 0
MN: 2 (MN3)
SN: 0
AN: 14 (all in AN5 starting at AN5:55)
KN: 3 (all in Mil)
anāvikatvā
VN: 5
DN: 0
MN: 0
SN: 0
AN: 4 (all in 5, starting at AN5.55)
KN: 0
methunaṁ
VN: 68
DN: 7 (starting at DN24)
MN: 1 (MN76)
SN: 0
AN: 11 (AN4.50 and then from AN5.55 as above)
KN: 19 (occuring in atthaka and cula, then mostly in Nidd)
AB: 11 (all in Pp and Kv)
paṭiseveyya
VN: 3
DN: 1 (DN24)
MN: 0
SN: 0
AN: 0
KN: 3 (all in Nidd)
AB: 7 (all in Kv)
tiracchānagatāyapi
VN: 3
DN: 0
MN: 0
SN: 0
AN: 0
KN: 0
AB: 0
asaṁvāso
KN: 17
DN: 0
MN: 0
SN: 0
AN: 5 (AN6.44 AN8.13)
KN: 3 (Dhp, Ja)
AB: 0
Yo pana bhikkhu gāmā vā araññā vā adinnaṁ theyyasaṅkhātaṁ ādiyeyya,
If a monk, intending to steal, takes from an inhabited area or from the wilderness what has not been given to him—
yathārūpe adinnādāne rājāno coraṁ gahetvā haneyyuṁ vā bandheyyuṁ vā pabbājeyyuṁ vā corosi bālosi mūḷhosi thenosīti, tathārūpaṁ bhikkhu adinnaṁ ādiyamāno
the sort of stealing for which kings, having caught a thief, would beat, imprison, or banish him, saying, ‘You’re a bandit, you’re a fool, you’ve gone astray, you’re a thief’—
ayampi pārājiko hoti asaṁvāso.
he too is expelled and excluded from the community.
theyyasaṅkhātaṁ
VN: 8
DN: 8 (DN26 DN29 DN33)
MN: 9 (MN41 MN42 MN76 MN114)
SN: 2 (SN42.13 SN55.7)
AN: 11 (starting at AN5.178)
KN: 0
AB: 0
ādiyeyya
VN: 21
DN: 1 (DN4)
MN: 0
SN: 2 (SN22.80 SN55.7)
AN: 9 (starting at AN5.30)
KN: 10 (Nidd and Mil)
AB: 6 (all in Kv)
adinnādāne
VN: 6
DN: 4 (all in DN26)
MN: 0
SN: 0
AN: 7 (AN3.164 AN4.201 AN10.221 or higher)
KN: 7 (all in Nidd)
AB: 3 (all in Pp)
similar results will occur with haneyyuṁ, bandheyyuṁ, pabbājeyyuṁ, corosi, bālosi, mūḷhosi and thenosīti but lets move on.
Yo pana bhikkhu sañcicca manussaviggahaṁ jīvitā voropeyya, satthahārakaṁ vāssa pariyeseyya, maraṇavaṇṇaṁ vā saṁvaṇṇeyya, maraṇāya vā samādapeyya
If a monk intentionally kills a human being or seeks an instrument of death for them or praises death or incites someone to die, saying,
“ambho purisa kiṁ tuyhiminā pāpakena dujjīvitena, mataṁ te jīvitā seyyo”ti,
‘My friend, what’s the point of this miserable and difficult life? Death is better for you than life!’—
iti cittamano cittasaṅkappo anekapariyāyena maraṇavaṇṇaṁ vā saṁvaṇṇeyya, maraṇāya vā samādapeyya,
thinking and intending thus, if he praises death in many ways or incites someone to die—
ayampi pārājiko hoti asaṁvāso.
he too is expelled and excluded from the community.
sañcicca
VN: 131
DN: 2 (DN29, DN33)
MN: 4 (MN76 MN86)
SN: 0
AN: 6 (starting at AN7.53)
KN: 3 (in Cp Ja and Mil)
AB: 9 (all in Kv)
manussaviggahaṁ
VN7
DN: 0
MN: 0
SN: 0
AN: 0
KN: 0
AB: 0
Again, interesting results are obtained with several other terms but a desire for alacrity compels me to move on.
Yo pana bhikkhu anabhijānaṁ uttarimanussadhammaṁ attupanāyikaṁ alamariyañāṇadassanaṁ samudācareyya “iti jānāmi, iti passāmī”ti,
If a monk falsely claims for himself a superhuman quality, a knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones, saying, ‘This I know, this I see,’
tato aparena samayena samanuggāhīyamāno vā asamanuggāhīyamāno vā āpanno visuddhāpekkho evaṁ vadeyya “ajānamevaṁ āvuso avacaṁ jānāmi, apassaṁ passāmi, tucchaṁ musā vilapi”nti,
but after some time—whether he is questioned or not, but having committed the offense and seeking purification—should say: ‘Not knowing I said that I know, not seeing that I see; what I said was empty and false,’ then,
aññatra adhimānā,
except if it is due to overestimation,
ayampi pārājiko hoti asaṁvāso.
he too is expelled and excluded from the community.
uttarimanussadhammaṁ
VN: 33
DN: 0
MN: 0
SN: 1 (SN41.4)
AN: 2 (AN6.77)
KN: 3 (Mil and Pet)
AB: 0
samanuggāhīyamāno
VN: 10
DN: 0
MN: 1 (MN93)
SN: 0
AN: 0
KN: 0
AB: 0
Anyway, I know people will come at me with critiques of my woeful ignorance, and by all means do, but please, if possible, make it constructive, give me clues and information about how to improve my methadology etc etc.
My impression so far is that the patimokkha uses a version of Pali that is quite different to the version in the bulk of the suttas, and that using patimokkha terms might be a good way of identifying suttas that deserve furthur investigation as it may betray lateness in those texts.
The failure to find any Vinaya literature at Gandahara apart from a patimokkha might be suggestive that at least at the beginning of the common era the Vinaya material was still mostly an oral tradition and was not considered “canonical” in the way the suttas where, nor as “technical” or “promotinal” the way abbhidhamma and poetic texts seem to be regarded.
The twin copy of the patimokkha found may even have been a study aid for the scribe that produced it, perhaps used in debate between to differing lineages of the Vinaya.
All this to me indicates that we might perhaps have a good candidate in the Vinaya, inclusive of it’s patimokkha for a period of the literature that begins to be fixed only after the beginning of the common era.
So my revised impression is:
Approx 500bce - lone forest contemplatives begin to distinguish themselves by doctrine
Approx 400bce - atthakavagga? parayanavagga?
Approx 300bce - munisutta, a larger and growing body of poetry becoming canonical with a floating commentary in prose still not considered as canonical
Approx 250bce - Ashoka
Approx 200bce - growing textuality starts to fix the prose around the verse, the 4 principle collections are evident, commentarial and abbhidhamma lit is beginning to be fixed.
Approx 100bce - Mahayana textual tradition emerges, Vinaya traditions begin to be considered for textuality and regularisation
Approx 0ce - Multiple patimokkhas, abbhidhammas and mahayana texts are evident.
…
Approx 500ce - Chinese translations and Buddhaghosa commentarial project indicates that the canon as we have it now is more or less fixed in the various textual transmissions.
Anyone have any suggestions what to read in either the primary or secondary literature for a good overview of what is known or suspected of the 0ce to 500ce period?
Metta.