Factually the term is not equally represented in the other nikayas, so it was transmitted only by certain bhanakas, and not by others. Additionally, to me at least, the Anguttara is the later of the eary nikayas, so in my mind the term was not used by the Buddha himself. But as I said, others can draw other conclusions.
It is the only way the nikayas refer to the Buddha’s Dhamma-Vinaya by specific name. Dhamma-Vinaya is mentioned much more often by a more vague ‘this Dhamma-Vinaya’ or an equally unspecific ‘svākkhāta dhammavinaya’ (the well-preached Dhamma-Vinaya).
I doubt that it was the Buddha’s name. For an older name more possibly going back to the Buddha I suggest words with ariya*, like ariyasacca or ariyadhamma or ariyamagga, but much more I would file this question under ‘no way to find out really’.
I think, according to SN 12.20 = SA 296, the Buddha calls his religion or teaching in overall as paṭicca-samuppāda/pratītya-samutpādaḥ (“arising by causal condition/conditioned arising”), and paṭicca-samuppannā dhammā/pratīya-samutpannā dharmāḥ (“dharmas (phenomena) arisen by causal condition”).
He explains the teaching in the text in terms of the two notions: (1) causal factors and (2) a natural law of phenomena, particularly the second notion, i.e. a natural law of phenomena. This is because he considers whether Buddhas/Tathāgatas arise in the world or not, it is just a natural law of phenomena; he only teaches it, reveals it, declares it, after being fully enlightened, fully understanding it (See pp. 150-153, in Choong Mun-keat, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism).
This seems more like a technical term that he used to perhaps boil down the essence or core of his teachings, no?
As opposed to a broad, inclusive, all-encompassing term that say, most closely corresponds to the term people use today to refer to his religion, “Buddhism.”
Yes, indeed. It is his core teachings for his religion according to SN/SA suttas.
It seems the Buddha in the EBTs never calls his religion as Buddhism.
But I think, the term, paṭicca-samuppāda/pratītya-samutpādaḥ, is inclusive, all-encompassing term. The Buddha’s religion is the teaching of Conditioned Arising/Genesis for mental health.
And you base this far-reaching claim - that DO is THE Buddhist teaching - on one sutta? Only, the same expression of SN 12.20 is used in SN 22.94 to describe the khandhas, and in AN 3.136 impermanence (sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā).
Correct. As mentioned previously, this is because the Buddha in text considers whether Buddhas/Tathāgatas arise in the world or not, it is just a natural law of phenomena; he only teaches it, reveals it, declares it, after being fully enlightened, fully understanding it.
I wish you would add “and yes, my theory is based on exactly one sutta”.
Also, AN 3.136:
Whether Realized Ones arise or not, this law of nature persists, this regularity of natural principles, this invariance of natural principles: all conditions are suffering.
Why is that a different expression than in SN 12.20 that you base your theory on?
Why don’t you call Buddhism sabbe-saṅkhārā-dukkhā-ism?
I think the point that he is trying to make is that the name for the Buddha’s religion should be one that the Buddha himself commonly used to refer to his religion as a whole - the sort of broadest, most inclusive designation for his religion. It seems that the name you suggested isn’t as common as other possibilities, I think.
Inspired by the example of the Buddha teaching in the vernacular Pali rather than the putatively authoritative Brahmanical Sanskrit in order to effectively communicate to everyone rather than a select elite, I’d suggest that use of the label “Buddhism” is actually pretty faithful to"Buddhism"! Moreover, it elevates a principle rather than a personality. Were it otherwise, then the dhamma might be called “Siddharthianity” or “Gotamism.” No single word can convey the richness of the teaching, thus so long as the label isn’t pejorative and dissuasive, e.g. “hinayana,” how important is it?
Over the last few years, I’ve come up with a few terms to roughly describe the stages of commitment and devotion experienced by many 21st-century English-speaking moderns:
1: Bu-curious
2: Buddhish
3: Actually Buddhist!
4 and beyond: see preceding discussion and/or monastic.
According to SN 55.28-29 (= SA 845-846), dhamma is ariyo ñāyo paññāya sudiṭṭho supaṭividdho “seeing well the noble method and penetrating it by insight”, which the specific contents are fully seeing paṭiccasamuppāda “arising by causal condition” (p. 231 in Choong MK’s The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism ).
So, the Buddha calls his religion (dhamma) as paṭiccasamuppāda.
