In Vinaya, Cullavagga, the Buddha advises bhikkhus not to use Vedic language (Chanda; i.e. Vedic Sanskrit) (Vin. II, PTS, p. 139 “Chandaso”) for the Buddha’s language/teachings (buddhavacana), but use your own language (sakāya niruttiyā) for the Buddha’s teachings. If making the Vedic language for the Buddha’s teachings, it will be corrupt.
The essential teaching here is “sakāya niruttiyā” (based on your own language) for the Buddha’s teachings “Buddhavacana”. No any languages, including Pali, should be regarded as an absolute Buddhavacana.
This understanding is very essential for the studies in EBTs or Early Buddhism.
Sorry Bhante, that sentence appears in the FAQ, under question 15. Not in the guidelines. My bad.
I’m sure there is plenty of wisdom in all sorts of texts. I usually consider the Mahayana sutras as “fake texts” exactly because they’re inauthentic. I guess it depends on how you define “fake”.
I mean there are lot of Mahayana texts that are literally identical to EBT’s but with the words “this too is empty” or something like that appended to the end of every sentence. Then there are major Mahayana works that do not in any way claim to be the words of the Buddha, like Nagarjuna’s Mulamadhyamakakarika for example.
And this site still hosts the Abhidhamma despite widespread acknowledgment that they aren’t quite as “E” as the other EBT.
Finally plenty of people who are interested in getting to the earliest strata of Buddhist texts (myself included) still don’t think we have any conclusive evidence that we actually get back to the lifetime of the Buddha or his actual words and phrases, so the idea that the crucial difference between Mahayana and “EBT’s” is that Mahayana texts where not spoken by the Buddha kind of implies that we have definitively arrived at the conclusion that the EBTs where and this is far from the case.
I agree with this. Nowhere have I claimed that the Pali canon contains the actual words of the Buddha. Nor have I claimed that all Mahayana texts claim to be the words of the Buddha, or that Mahayana schools don’t have their own versions of suttas found in the Pali canon.
All I wrote was that I consider Mahayana sutras to be fake, i.e. in their claims to contain a “higher teaching” of Lord Buddha. I never thought of that as a controversial opinion, which is why I was surprised to find it described as a “conspiracy theory” in the FAQ.
In Vinaya, Cullavagga, the Buddha advises bhikkhus not to use Vedic language (Chanda; i.e. Vedic Sanskrit) (Vin. II, PTS, p. 139 “Chandaso”) for the Buddha’s language/teachings (buddhavacana), but use your own language (sakāya niruttiyā) for the Buddha’s teachings. If making the Vedic language for the Buddha’s teachings, it will be corrupt.
To answer you let me quote Bhikkhu Sujato and Bhikkhu Brahmali (2014, 11-12), they enumerate the texts that qualify as Early Buddhist Texts:
They are the bulk of the Suttas in the main four Pali Nikayas and parallel Agama literature in Chinese, Tibetan, Sanskrit, and other Indian dialects; the patimokkhas and some Vinaya material from the khandhakas; a small portion of the Khuddaka Nikaya, consisting of the significant parts of the Sutta Nipata, Udana, Itivuttaka, Dhammapada, and Thera- and Theri Gatha. [emphasis added]
That prohibition is, to my knowledge, only in the Pali canon and therefore not a part of the EBTs. The Chinese Agamas are believed to be translations from a form of Sanskrit. Such a prohibition if taken literally would eliminate a lot that is considered EBTs.
[quote=“sujato, post:50, topic:5957”]
What principles, exactly? AN 2.23 says that one who says what was not spoken by the Buddha was spoken by him misrepresents the Buddha. Forgetting the Buddha’s words and attending to later teachings is said to be a decisive factor in the ending of Buddhism (SN 20.7, AN 5.79). This is not merely a matter of historical correctness, for correct understanding of what the Buddha taught and didn’t teach directly affects ones’ spiritual welfare (AN 1.132-139, SN 55.53). [/quote]
The Karuna Buddhist Vihara bhikkunis teach sutta study (EDIT: focus on nikayas MN, AN, SN, and DN, not so much commentaries or abhidhamma). Right now it’s Thursday nights (US Pacific time 7pm) over zoom, live. Chanting, meditation, read a sutta together, discuss the sutta’s meaning, ask questions, implications for life and practice.
Fair question. Using any and all tools available. I also have two teachers. They, of course, study the literature. Their dharma talks cite the literature (emphasize EBT, but also other literature - for comparisons and exposition), philosophy, psychology, theatre, science, religion, personal experience, the experience of others, and culture. The whole is more than the sum of its parts. But keeping it focused, I get it.
