Gandhāran Buddhist texts, believed to be the oldest Buddhist Manuscripts yet discovered.
Gandhānan manuscripts believed to be the oldest Buddhist manuscripts yet discovered, at least 50 or 60 scrolls or scroll fragments from northern Pakistan dated to the first century BCE to the second century of the Common Era.
I read it may contain a near complete Aṭṭhakavagga
AND
I am a little bewildered. I had my post removed on another Buddhist Board because it was “Not Theravada” and that the collection was all Mahayana. I know toward the end some texts were Mahayana… but both statements went over my head.
These texts aren’t “Theravādan” if we understand “Theravāda” to narrowly mean “Buddhism as espoused by the Mahavihara in Medieval Sri Lanka”
Of course, what “counts” as “Theravāda” is ultimately a political question, not really a factual one.
In this case, I assume they are rejecting the historical method entirely, as separating out Early Buddhism from (later) Theravāda goes right to the heart of the tradition’s mythology and self-conception and is thus threatening.
but, of course, each community is welcome to define the bounds of their discourse as they see fit. If that online community doesn’t want to engage with archeology, that’s their choice.
Whoa! I think I get it now. If you think of the transmission of the early Buddhist texts that come from Sri Lanka as being the only authentic voice of the Elder School of Buddhism, that means the Dharmaguptakas, Mūlasarvāstivādans and Mahāsāṃghikas all must be grouped together as “something else”, something not on the same level.
…and the Buddhist texts of Gandhara, although they are half a millennia earlier, can’t be thought of having something significant to offer either. My mistake was to group all of them together as “the Buddhism of the Elders” on the one hand as opposed to, on the other hand, the Mahayanaists.