SN 37 collection is entirely lacking in SA. Is it possible the texts were written in Sri Lanka? If so, one may need to consider the content within the tradition of the area.
I’d really love to hear a proposal for how this could have happened. In detail, start to finish, don’t skip any steps.
I have a hard time imagining monks waking up in the morning and deciding to invent a whole set of suttas and somehow sneak them in. The entire Theravada project rests on the idea that the texts come directly from the Buddha.
Of course anything you came up with would be speculation. But if you are going to propose something speculative, then I feel you have an obligation to flesh it out so it sound reasonable.
I realize this is kind of off topic in this thread. If it goes anywhere then perhaps the moderators could split it off.
3 Likes
In the reconstructed SA, it only has Āyatana Saṃyukta (= Saḷāyatana Saṃyutta) in the “Six Sense Spheres Section” (see p. 244; cf. p. 73, notes 1, 2 in Choong Mun-keat’s The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism).
In contrast, the SN Saḷāyatana Vagga “Six Sense Spheres Section” contains 10 samyuttas (i.e. 35-44 samyattas; see, p. 250 in the above-mentioned Choong’s book).
No, incorrect. The extant EBTs are just texts and sectarian texts, not the words directly from the Buddha.
Regarding the SN and SA versions on the “Six Sense Spheres Section”, see the above-mentioned information. Meanings of "co-wife" and "master my husband" in SN 37.32? - #24
1 Like
This just sounds like your sectarian opinion.
Can you please state which suttas were spoken by the Buddha and which were added later, perhaps in spreadsheet form?
It would be nice to know. Perhaps start a new thread- just text, sectarian text, authentic text, etc.
Also, what is the difference between something that is ‘just text’ and ‘sectarian text’?
2 Likes
No, this is just your opinion which may be true or not. And you are entitled to your opinion! But that was absolutely not the opinion of the Theravada monks in Sri Lanka.
Since you are not able to propose any scenario as to how monks in Sri Lanka who believed that the suttas were the word of the Buddha created their own, then I have to believe that you have no idea. This makes your proposal that they did just speculation. And again, you are welcome to do that. But we are also welcome to not take you very seriously.
3 Likes
One of the textual issues here is the reason why SN 37 Mātugāma Samyutta is being edited in Saḷāyatana Vagga? What is the connection between Mātugāma and Saḷāyatana?
p. 250 from The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism @ Choong Mun-keat.pdf (52.0 KB)
p. 244 from The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism @ Choong Mun-keat.pdf (56.2 KB)
Many (most?) samyuttas have no connection to the vagga they are in save the Sagāthāvagga. If we look at the canon as a whole only a portion of texts are found in vaggas whose titles reflect their topic. It’s just an artifact of how they were memorized. Having too many “miscellaneous” groupings is not helpful.
Thanks! Maybe we could start a new thread to discuss this and similar cases?
1 Like
Yes, Theravada monks in Sri Lanka are in fact religiously and traditionally believing Pali texts are the words directly from the Buddha.
Nevertheless, the extant all EBTs (including Chinese EBTs) are just texts and sectarian texts, not the words directly from the Buddha.
EBTs in history were first used other languages rather than the Buddha’s language.
The Buddha wanted anyone to use your own language/dialect (sakāya niruttiyā) for his teachings.
1 Like
How do you know this?
1 Like
The extant EBTs were also artificially created.
1 Like
Then reconcile these two things. How is it conceivable that a group of people who believe that the texts are the word of the Buddha could compose new ones? Make it make sense please.
3 Likes
The absolute horror of it all.
1 Like
As stated previously in another topic (such as sakāya niruttiyā), Pali, literally ‘text’, is based on a dialect (a Prakrit) from the region of Ujjeni/Ujjayani/Ujjain, capital of Avanti, in western India.
According to the Sinhalese Buddhist tradition, Mahinda and Saṅghamittā, who preached Buddhism in modern Sri Lanka, were born in Ujjeni.
Buddhaghosa also has had the purpose of making the Pali appear that the Pali Piṭakas had originated from the first Saṅgha council, and that the Pali language of the texts was identical with Magadhi, the language spoken by the Buddha.
The Buddha did not speak the Pali.
A group of people who used their languages to compose new ones was from the very early time. This is because the Buddha wanted anyone to use your own languages/dialects (sakāya niruttiyā) for his teachings.
Cf. the Chinese versions about the term, sakāya niruttiyā:
EBTs in history were thus first used other languages rather than the Buddha’s language.
Also, the extant all EBTs (not just the Pali) are just texts and sectarian texts, not the words directly from the Buddha.
1 Like
You are avoiding my question. Please re-read what I asked. If you can’t answer then it’s simple enough to admit it.
2 Likes
Not only does this not answer any of the questions raised by these ex cathedra conclusions, I can’t make sense of these statements.
Are you suggesting Buddhaghosa fabricated the Pali canon, writing his own suttas, then wrote commentaries to explain them?
2 Likes
What does this mean?
Are you suggesting Pali was a new contemporary language spoken at the time of Buddhaghosa in Sri Lanka?
3 Likes
Are you suggesting there was a massive and undocumented translation project undertaken in Sri Lanka to render the Dhamma into Pali (was Pali spoken in Sri Lanka? Why Pali?) or are you saying the Pali suttas were fabricated then?
2 Likes
Going from “there’s no parallel for SN 37 suttas in the Chinese SN” to “Did Sri Lankan monks invent those texts” is a giant leap. Those suttas may have been created long before Sri Lanka (if they were), and they may have had parallels in other collections besides SA. We, for instance, do not have the Sarvastivada Ekottarika Agama. The parallels may have been there, and now are lost. I notice that there is a parallel for a couple suttas in SN 37 in the EA that does still exist.
4 Likes