The origin of Sanghabheda Sutta

Q & A
1

Hi all,

There are some Suttas are not really the words of Buddha. For example, Karajakaya Sutta (AN 10.219), although this is the sutta of four nikayas but this sutta seems to have been influenced by Jains. It’s believed there was error during transmission therefore this sutta was patched from different sources.

From wikipedia about Anguttara Nikaya

According to Keown, “there is considerable disparity between the Pāli and the Sarvāstivādin versions, with more than two-thirds of the sūtras found in one but not the other compilation, which suggests that much of this portion of the Sūtra Piṭaka was not formed until a fairly late date.”

What about Sanghabheda Sutta, what is considered schism in the Sangha, is this truly the words of Buddha or is this something developed later? Thanks.

2

Anyone?

3

I know that in some cases there are differences between the Agamas and the Nikayas because of how texts were classified- a certain text might be part of the Majjhima Nikaya but the Dirgha Agama or vice-versa. I don’t know if there is a parallel in another place for this one, other than the Vinaya version that you mentioned in the other thread.

The verse about the fate of one who splits the Sangha is from the Itivuttaka: SuttaCentral

Is there something about this particular text that makes you think it is (or isn’t) authentic? With short texts there isn’t a lot to work from… unless there is vocabulary or something that’s particularly distinct, I would imagine it would be hard to distinguish from the other texts in the collection.