Who teaches according to the EBTs in the US?

[thomaslaw]

@sujato

this is 100% driven by the underlying historical text scholarship of Master Yin Shun and others. Historical understanding has already led to many very positive and vital reforms in modern Taiwanese Buddhism, and hopefully it will lead to many more.

@neonative

Bhante, Thank you for your wonderful reply. I agree with most everything you stated, and I would be interested in researching more into who is seriously conducting critical analysis of the differences and commonalities between textual traditions in Asia.

The following previous postings may be relevant to your interests on Master YinShun (and his follower Ven. Choong Mun-keat’s works on Samyutta/Samyukta comparative studies):

Corruption of the dhamma

For knowing what is real corruption of the Buddha-dhamma/dharma, one first needs to know historically which EBTs represents the situation with regard to the compilation of the Buddhist teachings shortly after the death of the Buddha. According to Ven. YinShun, SA/SN is an early compilation, whose structure had its origin in the first Buddhist council. Although the extant SA and SN are sectarian texts, one can seek an understanding of early Buddhist teachings by studying them comparatively. Cf.: …

EBTs (such as the principal source, the four Nikayas/Agamas) are just texts, some compiled/edited early, some later. EBTs were gradually developed and expanded. EBTs were not entirely established at once at the first council in complete form (structure) and content. The extant EBTs are sectarian texts. One can seek an understanding of early Buddhist teachings by studying them comparatively.