EDIT: I modified the title to include “discussion about locating ‘early sectarian’ buddhism” to reflect the conversation unfolding below.
I would like to take a moment to talk about vaipulya practices in Buddhism, and troping in Medieval Christianity, and then present something which I hope will be interesting: namely, a “EBT kosher” vaipulya of sorts, but first I have to establish a few things to explain myself and this little pet project I decided to work on before I work on much less pleasant work that I actually get paid for!
A vaipulyasūtra is a scholastically elaborated and expanded piece of Buddhavacana (or a compilation of numerous disparate pieces of Buddhavacana), that merges sūtra with commentary in a fusion that is questionable to Buddhists of some traditions, namely because it has the potentiality to confuse purported Buddhavacana with interpretation of that Buddhavacana.
If you believe the interpretation & interpreter if the vaipulya, than this is not an issue. One of the many theories about the nascent growth of difference between earlier Buddhisms and the Mahāyāna movement has it starting with the compilation of these vaipulya (the older prajñāpāramtāsūtrāṇi are often vaipulyas, but also sūtrāṇi like the Lotus Sutra and Mahāyāna Great Parinirvana Sutra are classified as “vaipulya”).
A trope, and this is specifically the musicological medieval definition of a trope, is a text that is inserted into another text to explain, highlight, or clarify elements of the original text. This practice was much used in medieval Christian literature.
For the sake of clarification, here is a prayer entitled Alleluia nativitas:[quote]Alleluia. Solémnitas gloriósae Vírginis Maríæ, ex seémine Abrahæ, órtæ de tríbu Júda, clára ex stírpe Dávid.[/quote]And here is the “Western vaipulya” (i.e. here it is with a trope inserted in italics and the original text in bold):[quote]Alleluia. Solémnitas gloriósae Vírginis Maríæ, ex seémine Abrahæ, divino Moderamine, igne pio numine producis domine, hominis salutem, paupertate nuda, virginis nativitate de tríbu Júda. Iam propinas ovum, piscem, panem dabis, partu sine semine órtæ de tríbu Júda, clára ex stírpe Dávid.[/quote][details=Latin geekery, troping & vaipulya as “patchwork”]Those in the know might be able to tell apart the text of the trope and the original because of the two different styles of Latin being used. This “patchwork” effect is characteristic of this practice, and it would be interesting if something of the like where to be found in vaipulya manuscripts. If this was demonstrable, it would be interesting and compelling to those engaged in inquiry into EBTs, because it would label certain sections of vaipulya as definitively “earlier”, though not necessarily “early”, and these may constitute “untraced suttas”, such as those references in many early sectarian Abhidharmāḥ. Alas, as far as I know, this is not the case.[/details]
Since the major issue with vaipulya, as a practice, is 1) questionable Buddhavacana, and 2) the danger of putting words into the Buddha’s mouth, if we sidestep and keep these criticisms of the practice in mind, I think what we will get is something like this, if vaipulya existed as a practice still endorsed in Buddhism:[quote]And what, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops right view, which is based upon seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release: this is called the path leading to the unconditioned.
And what, bhikhhus, is right view?
When, friends, a noble disciple understands the unwholesome and the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome and the root of the wholesome, in that way he is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has unwavering confidence in the Dhamma and has arrived at this true Dhamma.
And what, friends, is the unwholesome, what is the root of the unwholesome, what is the wholesome, what is the root of the wholesome? Killing living beings is unwholesome; taking what is not given is unwholesome; misconduct in sensual pleasures is unwholesome; false speech is unwholesome; malicious speech is unwholesome; harsh speech is unwholesome; gossip is unwholesome; covetousness is unwholesome; ill will is unwholesome; wrong view is unwholesome. This is called the unwholesome.
And what is the root of the unwholesome? Greed is a root of the unwholesome; hate is a root of the unwholesome; delusion is a root of the unwholesome. This is called the root of the unwholesome.
And what is the wholesome? Abstention from killing living beings is wholesome; abstention from taking what is not given is wholesome; abstention from misconduct in sensual pleasures is wholesome; abstention from false speech is wholesome; abstention from malicious speech is wholesome; abstention from harsh speech is wholesome; abstention from gossip is wholesome; uncovetousness is wholesome; non-ill will is wholesome; right view is wholesome. This is called the wholesome.
And what is the root of the wholesome? Non-greed is a root of the wholesome; non-hate is a root of the wholesome; non-delusion is a root of the wholesome. This is called the root of the wholesome.
When a noble disciple has thus understood the unwholesome and the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome and the root of the wholesome, he entirely abandons the underlying tendency to lust, he abolishes the underlying tendency to aversion, he extirpates the underlying tendency to the view and conceit ‘I am,’ and by abandoning ignorance and arousing true knowledge he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has unwavering confidence in the Dhamma, and has arrived at this true Dhamma.
What, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops right intention.
And what, bhikkhus, is right intention? Intention of renunciation, intention of non-ill will, intention of harmlessness: this is called right intention.
What, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops right speech.
And what, bhikkhus, is right speech? Abstinence from false speech, abstinence from divisive speech, abstinence from harsh speech, abstinence from idle chatter: this is called right speech. False speech, repeatedly pursued, developed, and cultivated, is conducive to hell, to the animal realm, and to the sphere of afflicted spirits; for one reborn as a human being false speech at minimum conduces to false accusations.
What, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops right action.
And what, bhikkhus, is right action? Here, someone, having abandoned the destruction of life, abstains from the destruction of life; with the rod and weapon laid aside, conscientious and kindly, he dwells compassionate toward all living beings. Having not abandoned the destruction of life, someone destroys life; he is murderous, bloody-handed, given to blows and violence, merciless to living beings. He creeps along by body, speech, and mind. His bodily kamma is crooked; his verbal kamma is crooked; his mental kamma is crooked. His destination is crooked; his rebirth is crooked. But for one with a crooked destination and rebirth, I say, there is one of two destinations: either the exclusively painful hells or a species of creeping animal. And what are the species of creeping animals? The snake, the scorpion, the centipede, the mongoose, the cat, the mouse, and the owl, or any other animals that creep away when they see people. Thus a being is reborn from a being; one is reborn through one’s deeds. When one has been reborn, contacts affect one. It is in this way, I say, that beings are the heirs of their kamma. Abstinence from the destruction of life, abstinence from taking what is not given, abstinence from sexual misconduct: this is called right action.
What, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops right livelihood.
And what, bhikkhus, is right livelihood? Right livelihood, I say, is twofold: there is right livelihood that is affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions; and there is right livelihood that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path. And what, bhikkhus, is right livelihood that is affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the acquisitions? Here, bhikkhus, a noble disciple abandons wrong livelihood and gains his living by right livelihood: this is right livelihood that is affected by taints…ripening in the acquisitions. And what, bhikkhus, is right livelihood that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path? The desisting from wrong livelihood, the abstaining, refraining, abstinence from it in one whose mind is noble, whose mind is taintless, who possesses the noble path and is developing the noble path: this is right livelihood that is noble and a factor of the path. Here a noble disciple, having abandoned a wrong mode of livelihood, earns his living by a right livelihood: this is called right livelihood.
What, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops right effort.
And what, bhikkhus, is right effort? One makes an effort to abandon wrong livelihood and to enter upon right livelihood: this is one’s right effort. Mindfully one abandons wrong livelihood, mindfully one enters upon and dwells in right livelihood: this is one’s right mindfulness. Thus these three states run and circle around right livelihood, that is, right view, right effort, and right mindfulness.
What, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops right mindfulness.
And what, bhikkhus, is right mindfulness? One of good will, ever mindful, inwardly well concentrated, training to remove longing, is said to be heedful. Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu dwells contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. He dwells contemplating feelings in feelings, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. He dwells contemplating mind in mind, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. He dwells contemplating phenomena in phenomena, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having removed covetousness and displeasure in regard to the world. This is called right mindfulness.
What, bhikkhus, is the path leading to the unconditioned? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops right concentration, which is based upon seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release: this is called the path leading to the unconditioned.
Thus, bhikkhus, I have taught you the unconditioned and the path leading to the unconditioned. Whatever should be done, bhikkhus, by a compassionate teacher out of compassion for his disciples, desiring their welfare, that I have done for you. These are the feet of trees, bhikkhus, these are empty huts. Meditate, bhikkhus, do not be negligent, lest you regret it later. This is our instruction to you.”[/quote]I would not try to pass this off as Buddhavacana (although it is pieced together from Buddhavacana, namely SN 45.8, AN 10.212, AN 8.40, AN 10.216, SN 11.21, MN 9, SN 43.12 ( xxxviii–xlv), MN 117, & AN 4.30) , but I thought this might be an interesting excersize in exploring possible models for “EBT vaipulya”.
There are a few issues with it 
that mark it as obviously being the product of a mere 2 hours of work, most of it reading, copying, pasting, and formatting, and although I have tried to select examples that I do not think are particularly controversial, it could do with a great deal more thought, particularly since my idea was to make an “expanded” eightfold path exposition, just to show what some early vaipulya might have looked a little bit like, and what vaipulya might appear like with some of their controversial qualities set aside. Ultimately this was just an excuse for me to make a post talking about vaipulya, and their relation to EBTs, but I figured an example of a vaipulya made exclusively from EBTs might be interesting to see.
