Jump to content

Pre-sectarian Buddhism: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→Further reading: Added subheader
Added info, references, source
Line 52: Line 52:
According to Tilmann Vetter, the core of earliest Buddhism is the practice of ''[[Dhyāna in Buddhism|dhyāna]]''.{{sfn|Vetter|1988}} Vetter notes that "penetrating abstract truths and penetrating them successively does not seem possible in a state of mind which is without contemplation and reflection."{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxvii}} Vetter further argues that the eightfold path constitutes a body of practices which prepare one, and lead up to, the practice of ''dhyana''.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxx}}
According to Tilmann Vetter, the core of earliest Buddhism is the practice of ''[[Dhyāna in Buddhism|dhyāna]]''.{{sfn|Vetter|1988}} Vetter notes that "penetrating abstract truths and penetrating them successively does not seem possible in a state of mind which is without contemplation and reflection."{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxvii}} Vetter further argues that the eightfold path constitutes a body of practices which prepare one, and lead up to, the practice of ''dhyana''.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxx}}


Bronkhorst agrees that ''dhyana'' was a Buddhist invention,{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993}} and Gombrich also notes that a development took place in early Buddhism resulting in a change in doctrine, which considered ''prajna'' to be an alternative means to "enlightenment".{{sfn|gombrich|1997|p=131}}
Bronkhorst agrees that ''dhyana'' was a Buddhist invention,{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993}} whereas Norman notes that "the Buddha's way to release [...] was by means of meditative practices."{{sfn|Norman|1997|p=29}} Gombrich also notes that a development took place in early Buddhism resulting in a change in doctrine, which considered ''prajna'' to be an alternative means to "enlightenment".{{sfn|gombrich|1997|p=131}}

====Insight====
According to Johannes Bronkhorst,{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993}} Tillman Vetter,{{sfn|Vetter|1988}} and K.R. Norman,{{sfn|Norman|1997|p=29}} ''bodhi'' was at first not specified. K.R. Norman:
{{quote|It is not at all clear what gaining ''bodhi'' means. We are accustomed to the translation [[Enlightenment in Buddhism|"enlightenment"]] for ''bodhi'', but this is misleading [...] It is not clear what the buddha was awakened to, or at what particular point the awakening came.{{sfn|Norman|1997|p=29}}}}

According to Norman, ''bodhi'' may basically have meant the knowledge that ''nibbana'' was attained,{{sfn|Norman|1997|p=30}}{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxix, xxxi}} due to the practice of ''dhyana''.{{sfn|Norman|1997|p=29}}{{sfn|Vetter|1988}}

⚫
Bronkhorst notes that the conception of what exactly this "liberating insight" was developed throughout time. Whereas originally it may not have been specified, later on the four truths served as such, to be superseded by ''pratityasamutpada'', and still later, in the Hinayana schools, by the doctrine of the non-existence of a substantial self or person.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=100-101}} And Schmithausen notices that still other descriptions of this "liberating insight" exist in the Buddhist canon:
⚫
{{quote|"that the five Skandhas are impermanent, disagreeable, and neither the Self nor belonging to oneself";{{refn|group=note|Majjhima Nikaya 26}} "the contemplation of the arising and disappearance (''udayabbaya'') of the five Skandhas";{{refn|group=note|Anguttara Nikaya II.45 (PTS)}} "the realisation of the Skandhas as empty (''rittaka''), vain (''tucchaka'') and without any pith or substance (''asaraka'').{{refn|group=note|Samyutta Nikaya III.140-142 (PTS)}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=101}}}}

Discriminating insight into transiency as a separate path to liberation was a later development.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxxiv-xxxvii}}{{sfn|Gombrich|1997|p=131}} This may have been to due an over-literal interpretation by later scholastics of the terminology used by the Buddha,{{sfn|Gombrich|1997|p=96-134}} or to the problems involved with the practice of ''dhyana'', and the need to develop an easier method.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxxv}} According to Vetter it may not have been as effective as ''dhyana'', and methods were developed to deepen the effects of discriminating insight.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxxv}} It was also paired to ''dhyana'', resulting in the well-known ''sila-samadhi-prajna'' scheme.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxxv}} According to Vetter this kind of preparatory ''"dhyana"'' must have been different from the the practice introduced by the Buddha, using [[kasina]]-exercises to produce a "more artificially produced dhyana", resulting in the cessation of apperceptions and feelings.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxxvi}} It also lead to a different understanding of the eightfold path, since this path does nit end with insight, but rather starts with insight. The path was no longer seen as a sequential development resulting in ''dhyana'', but as a set of practices which had to be developed simultaneously to gain insight.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxxvi-xxxvii}}


====The eightfold path====
====The eightfold path====
Line 80: Line 91:
{{quote|[I]t is more likely that the four truths are an addition to the biographies of the Buddha and to the Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta.{{sfn|Anderson|1999|p=17}}}}
{{quote|[I]t is more likely that the four truths are an addition to the biographies of the Buddha and to the Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta.{{sfn|Anderson|1999|p=17}}}}


According to both Bronkhorst and Anderson, the four truths became a substitution for prajna, or "liberating insight", in the suttas.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=99-100, 102-111}}{{sfn|Anderson|1999}} According to Bronkhorst, the four truths may not have been formulated in earliest Buddhism, and did not serve in earliest Buddhism as a description of "liberating insight".{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=107}} Gotama's teachings may have been personal, "adjusted to the need of each person."{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=108}}
According to both Bronkhorst and Anderson, the four truths became a substitution for prajna, or "liberating insight", in the suttas{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=99-100, 102-111}}{{sfn|Anderson|1999}} in those texts where "liberating insight" was preceded by the four jhanas.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=108}} According to Bronkhorst, the four truths may not have been formulated in earliest Buddhism, and did not serve in earliest Buddhism as a description of "liberating insight".{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=107}} Gotama's teachings may have been personal, "adjusted to the need of each person."{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=108}}

⚫
Originally the term ''prajna'' may have been used, which came to be replaced by the four truths in those texts where "liberating insight" was preceded by the four jhanas.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=108}} Bronkhorst also notices that the conception of what exactly this "liberating insight" was developed throughout time. Whereas originally it may not have been specified, later on the four truths served as such, to be superseded by ''pratityasamutpada'', and still later, in the Hinayana schools, by the doctrine of the non-existence of a substantial self or person.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=100-101}} And Schmithausen notices that still other descriptions of this "liberating insight" exist in the Buddhist canon:
⚫
{{quote|"that the five Skandhas are impermanent, disagreeable, and neither the Self nor belonging to oneself";{{refn|group=note|Majjhima Nikaya 26}} "the contemplation of the arising and disappearance (''udayabbaya'') of the five Skandhas";{{refn|group=note|Anguttara Nikaya II.45 (PTS)}} "the realisation of the Skandhas as empty (''rittaka''), vain (''tucchaka'') and without any pith or substance (''asaraka'').{{refn|group=note|Samyutta Nikaya III.140-142 (PTS)}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=101}}}}


This replacement was probably caused by the influence and pressures of the wider Indian religious landscape, "which claimed that one can be released only by some gtruth or higher knowledge."{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxxiii}}
An example of this substitution, and its consequences, is Majjhima Nikaya 36:42-43, which gives an account of the awakening of the Buddha.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=102-103}}


====Bodhipakkhiyādhammā====
====Bodhipakkhiyādhammā====
Line 124: Line 132:
* {{Citation | last =Nakamura | year =1989 | title =Indian Buddhism'' | publisher =Motilal Banarsidas}}
* {{Citation | last =Nakamura | year =1989 | title =Indian Buddhism'' | publisher =Motilal Banarsidas}}
* {{Citation | last =Norman | first =K.R. | year =1992 | title =The Four Noble Truths. In: "Collected Papers", vol 2:210-223 | publisher =Pali Text Society, 2003}}
* {{Citation | last =Norman | first =K.R. | year =1992 | title =The Four Noble Truths. In: "Collected Papers", vol 2:210-223 | publisher =Pali Text Society, 2003}}
* {{Citation | last =Norman | first =K.R. | year =1997 | title =A Philological Approach to Buddhism. The Bukkyo Dendo Kybkai Lectures 1994 | publisher =School ofOriental and African Studies
(University of London) | url =http://ahandfulofleaves.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/a-philological-approach-to-buddhism_norman_tbf_1997.pdf}}
* {{Citation | last =Schmithausen | first =Lambert | year =1981 | title =On some Aspects of Descriptions or Theories of 'Liberating Insight' and 'Enlightenment' in Early Buddhism". In: Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus (Gedenkschrift für Ludwig Alsdorf), hrsg. von Klaus Bruhn und Albrecht Wezler, Wiesbaden 1981, 199-250}}
* {{Citation | last =Schmithausen | first =Lambert | year =1981 | title =On some Aspects of Descriptions or Theories of 'Liberating Insight' and 'Enlightenment' in Early Buddhism". In: Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus (Gedenkschrift für Ludwig Alsdorf), hrsg. von Klaus Bruhn und Albrecht Wezler, Wiesbaden 1981, 199-250}}
* {{Citation | last =Vetter | first =Tilmann | year =1988 | title =The Ideas and Meditative Practices of Early Buddhism | publisher =BRILL}}
* {{Citation | last =Vetter | first =Tilmann | year =1988 | title =The Ideas and Meditative Practices of Early Buddhism | publisher =BRILL}}

Revision as of 08:35, 12 November 2014

Part of a series on
Early Buddhism
Buddhism
Scriptures
Early sangha
Pre-sectarian Buddhism
Early Buddhist schools
Terms
See also: Early Buddhism

Pre-sectarian Buddhism,[1] also called early Buddhism,[2][3] the earliest Buddhism,[4][5] and original Buddhism,[6] is the Buddhism that existed before the various subsects of Buddhism came into being.[web 1]

Some of the contents and teachings of this pre-sectarian Buddhism may be deduced from the earliest Buddhist texts, which by themselves are already sectarian.[note 1][note 2][note 3]

Name

Various terms are being used to refer to the earliest period of Buddhism:

Some Japanese scholars refer to the subsequent period of the Early Buddhist Schools as sectarian Buddhism.[2][3]

Time-span

Pre-sectarian Buddhism refers to Buddhism as existing about one hundred years after the Parinirvana of the Buddha,[citation needed] in the period between the first discourse of Gautama Buddha until the first enduring split in the Sangha.[citation needed] This split occurred, according to most scholars, between the second Buddhist council and the third Buddhist council.[8]

Shortly after the second Buddhist council the first long-lasting schisms occurred in the Sangha. The first post-schismatic groups are often stated to be the Sthaviravada and the Mahasanghika.[note 5]

Contents and teachings of earliest Buddhism

Sources on pre-sectarian Buddhism

Information on the contents and teachings of the earliest Buddhism cannot be obtained from the existing Buddhist schools, nor the from the Early Buddhist schools, since they were sectarian form the outset.[1][note 1]

The oldest texts are the four main nikayas of the Sutta Pitaka,[note 6] together with the main body of monastic rules, the Vinaya Pitaka.[citation needed] Scholars have also claimed that there is a core within this core, referring to some poems and phrases which seem to be the oldest parts of the Sutta Pitaka.[9][note 7]

The information on the earliest Buddhism is based on a comparison of the Theravadin Pali Canon, the surviving portions of the scriptures of Sarvastivada, Mulasarvastivada, Mahisasaka, Dharmaguptaka and other schools,[6] and the Chinese Agamas and other surviving portions of other early canons.[citation needed]}[note 8] [note 9]

Reliablility of the sources

The reliability of these sources, and the possibility to draw out a core of oldest teachings, is a matter of dispute.[11][12][13][14] According to Schmithausen, three positions held by scholars of Buddhism can be distinguished:[15]

  1. Stress on the fundamental homogeneity and substantial authenticity of at least a considerable part of the Nikayic materials;[note 12]
  2. Scepticism with regard to the possibility of retrieving the doctrine of earliest Buddhism;[note 14]
  3. Cautious optimism in this respect.[note 17]

Dhyana and insight

A core problem in the study of early Buddhism is the relation between dhyana and insight.[12][21][14] The Buddhist tradition has incorporated two traditions regarding the use of jhana.[11] There is a tradition that stresses attaining insight (Bodhi, prajna, kensho) as the means to awakening and liberation. But it has also incorporated the yogic tradition, as reflected in the use of jhana, which is rejected in other sutras as not resulting in the final result of liberation.[12][21][14] The problem was famously voiced in 1936 by Louis de La Vallee Poussin, in his text Musila et Narada: Le Chemin de Nirvana.[22][note 18]

Schmithausen, in his often-cited article On some Aspects of Descriptions or Theories of 'Liberating Insight' and 'Enlightenment' in Early Buddhism notes that the mention of the four noble truths as constituting "liberating insight", which is attained after mastering the Rupa Jhanas, is a later addition to texts such as Majjhima Nikaya 36.[23][11][12] Schmithausen discerns three possible roads to liberation as described in the suttas, to which Vetter adds a fourth possibility:[24]

  1. Mastering the four Rupa Jhanas, where-after "liberating insight" is attained;
  2. Mastering the four Rupa Jhanas and the four Arupa Jhanas, where-after "liberating insight" is attained;
  3. Liberating insight itself suffices;
  4. The four Rupa Jhanas themselves constituted the core liberating practice of early buddhism, c.q. the Buddha.[25]

This problem has been elaborated by several well-known scholars, including Tilman Vetter,[12] Johannes Bronkhorst,[21] and Richard Gombrich.[14]

Core teachings

The Dhamma-cakka-ppavattana sutra[note 19] is regarded by the buddhist tradition as the first talk of the Buddha.[26] Scholars have noted some persistent problems with this view.[27] Originally the text may only have pointed at "the middle way" as being the core of the Buddha's teaching,[26] which pointed to the practice of dhyana.[12] This basic term was extensified with descriptions of the eightfold path,[12] itself a condensation of a longer sequence.[28] Under pressure of developments in Indian religiosity, which began to see "liberating insight" as the essence of moksha,[29] the four noble truths were added, as a description of the Buddha's "liberating insight".[26]

Dhyana

According to Tilmann Vetter, the core of earliest Buddhism is the practice of dhyāna.[12] Vetter notes that "penetrating abstract truths and penetrating them successively does not seem possible in a state of mind which is without contemplation and reflection."[30] Vetter further argues that the eightfold path constitutes a body of practices which prepare one, and lead up to, the practice of dhyana.[31]

Bronkhorst agrees that dhyana was a Buddhist invention,[11] whereas Norman notes that "the Buddha's way to release [...] was by means of meditative practices."[32] Gombrich also notes that a development took place in early Buddhism resulting in a change in doctrine, which considered prajna to be an alternative means to "enlightenment".[33]

Insight

According to Johannes Bronkhorst,[11] Tillman Vetter,[12] and K.R. Norman,[32] bodhi was at first not specified. K.R. Norman:

It is not at all clear what gaining bodhi means. We are accustomed to the translation "enlightenment" for bodhi, but this is misleading [...] It is not clear what the buddha was awakened to, or at what particular point the awakening came.[32]

According to Norman, bodhi may basically have meant the knowledge that nibbana was attained,[34][35] due to the practice of dhyana.[32][12]

Bronkhorst notes that the conception of what exactly this "liberating insight" was developed throughout time. Whereas originally it may not have been specified, later on the four truths served as such, to be superseded by pratityasamutpada, and still later, in the Hinayana schools, by the doctrine of the non-existence of a substantial self or person.[36] And Schmithausen notices that still other descriptions of this "liberating insight" exist in the Buddhist canon:

"that the five Skandhas are impermanent, disagreeable, and neither the Self nor belonging to oneself";[note 20] "the contemplation of the arising and disappearance (udayabbaya) of the five Skandhas";[note 21] "the realisation of the Skandhas as empty (rittaka), vain (tucchaka) and without any pith or substance (asaraka).[note 22][37]

Discriminating insight into transiency as a separate path to liberation was a later development.[38][39] This may have been to due an over-literal interpretation by later scholastics of the terminology used by the Buddha,[40] or to the problems involved with the practice of dhyana, and the need to develop an easier method.[41] According to Vetter it may not have been as effective as dhyana, and methods were developed to deepen the effects of discriminating insight.[41] It was also paired to dhyana, resulting in the well-known sila-samadhi-prajna scheme.[41] According to Vetter this kind of preparatory "dhyana" must have been different from the the practice introduced by the Buddha, using kasina-exercises to produce a "more artificially produced dhyana", resulting in the cessation of apperceptions and feelings.[42] It also lead to a different understanding of the eightfold path, since this path does nit end with insight, but rather starts with insight. The path was no longer seen as a sequential development resulting in dhyana, but as a set of practices which had to be developed simultaneously to gain insight.[43]

The eightfold path

According to Vetter, the description of the Buddhist path may initially have been as simple as the term "the middle way".[12] In time, this short description was elaborated, resulting in the description of the eightfold path.[12] Vetter and Bucknell both note that longer descriptions of "the path" can be found, which can be condensed into the eightfold path.[12][28] One of those longer sequences, from the CulaHatthipadopama-sutta, the "Lesser Discourse on the Simile of the Elephant's Footprints", is as follows:[44]

  1. Dhammalsaddhalpabbajja: A layman hears a Buddha teach the Dhamma, comes to have faith in him, and decides to take ordination as a monk;
  2. sila: He adopts the moral precepts;
  3. indriyasamvara: He practises "guarding the six sense-doors";
  4. sati-sampajanna: He practises mindfulness and self-possession (actually described as mindfulness of the body, kdydnussati);
  5. jhana 1: He finds an isolated spot in which to meditate, purifies his mind of the hindrances (nwarana), and attains the first rupa-jhana;
  6. jhana 2: He attains the second jhana';
  7. jhana 3: He attains the third jhana;
  8. jhana 4: He attains the fourth jhana;
  9. pubbenivasanussati-nana: he recollects his many former existences in samsara;
  10. sattanam cutupapata-nana: he observes the death and rebirth of beings according to their karmas;
  11. dsavakkhaya-nana: He brings about the destruction of the dsavas (cankers), and attains a profound realization of (as opposed to mere knowledge about) the four noble truths;
  12. vimutti: He perceives that he is now liberated, that he has done what was to be done.

The four truths

K.R. Norman concluded that the earliest version of the Dhamma-cakka-ppavattana sutra sutta did not contain the word "noble", but was added later.[45][note 23] Lambert Schmithausen concluded that the four truths were a later development in early Buddhism.[11]

Carol Anderson, following Lambert Schmithausen and K.R. Norman, notes that the four truths are missing in critical passages in the canon,[49] and states:

... the four noble truths were probably not part of the earliest strata of what came to be recognized as Buddhism, but that they emerged as a central teaching in a slightly later period that still preceded the final redactions of the various Buddhist canons.[50]

The four truths probably entered the Sutta Pitaka from the Vinaya, the rules for monastic order. They were first added to enlightenment-stories which contain the Four Jhanas, replacing terms for "liberating insight". from there they were added to the biographical stories of the Buddha:[27]

[I]t is more likely that the four truths are an addition to the biographies of the Buddha and to the Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta.[51]

According to both Bronkhorst and Anderson, the four truths became a substitution for prajna, or "liberating insight", in the suttas[52][27] in those texts where "liberating insight" was preceded by the four jhanas.[53] According to Bronkhorst, the four truths may not have been formulated in earliest Buddhism, and did not serve in earliest Buddhism as a description of "liberating insight".[54] Gotama's teachings may have been personal, "adjusted to the need of each person."[53]

This replacement was probably caused by the influence and pressures of the wider Indian religious landscape, "which claimed that one can be released only by some gtruth or higher knowledge."[29]

Bodhipakkhiyādhammā

Warder regards the Bodhipakkhiyādhammā, the 37 factors of enlightenment, to be a summary of the core Buddhist teachings which is common to all schools.[55] These factors are summarized Maha-parinibbana Sutta,[note 24] which recounts the Buddha's last days, in the Buddha's last address to his bikkhus:

Now, O bhikkhus, I say to you that these teachings of which I have direct knowledge and which I have made known to you — these you should thoroughly learn, cultivate, develop, and frequently practice, that the life of purity may be established and may long endure, for the welfare and happiness of the multitude, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, well being, and happiness of gods and men.
And what, bhikkhus, are these teachings? They are the four foundations of mindfulness, the four right efforts, the four constituents of psychic power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven factors of enlightenment, and the Noble Eightfold Path. These, bhikkhus, are the teachings of which I have direct knowledge, which I have made known to you, and which you should thoroughly learn, cultivate, develop, and frequently practice.[web 2]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ a b Leon Hurvitz: "... stressed that the written canon in Buddhism is sectarian from the outset, and that presectarian Buddhism must be deduced from the writings as they now exist."[1](quote via Google Scholar search-engine)
  2. ^ a b J.W. De Jong: "It would be hypocritical to assert that nothing can be said about the doctrine of earliest Buddhism [...] the basic ideas of Buddhism found in the canonical writings could very well have been proclaimed by him [the Buddha], transmitted and developed by his disciples and, finally, codified in fixed formulas."[5]
  3. ^ a b A.K Warder: "...a reconstruction of the original Buddhism presupposed by the traditions of the different schools known to us."[6]
  4. ^ This kernel of doctrine is presumably common Buddhism of the period "before the schisms of the fourth and third centuries BC. It may be substantially the Buddhism of the Buddha himself."[6]
  5. ^ Collin Cox: "Virtually all later sources agree that the first schism within the early Buddhist community occurred with the separation of the Mahasamghika school, or "those of the great community," from the remaining monks referred to as Sthaviras, or the "elders."".[8]
  6. ^ The Digha Nikaya, Majjhima Nikaya, Samyutta Nikaya and Anguttara Nikaya
  7. ^ Nakamura: "It has been made clear that some poem (Gāthā) portions and some phrases represent earlier layers [...] Based upon these portions of the scriptures we can construe aspects of original Buddhism [...] Buddhism as appears in earlier portions of the scriptures is fairly different from what is explained by many scholars as earlier Buddhism or primitive Buddhism.[9]
  8. ^ Warder: "When we examine the Tripitakas of the eighteen schools, so far as they are extant, we find an agreement which is substantial, though not complete. Even the most conservative of the early schools seem to have added new texts to their collections. However, there is a central body of sutras (dialogues), in four groups, which is so similar in all known versions that we must accept these as so many recensions of the same original texts. These make up the greater part of the Sutra Pitaka."[10]
  9. ^ Most of these non-Indian texts are only available in a Chinese translation, with the exception of some individual scriptures found in Nepal, which are composed in Sanskrit.[6] The Gandhāran Buddhist Texts were recovered from Afghanistan. The central body of sutras in these texts is so similar that they are considered to be different recensions of the same text.[6]
  10. ^ According to A.K. Warder, in his 1970 publication "Indian Buddhism", from the oldest extant texts a common kernel can be drawn out.[16] According to Warder, c.q. his publisher: "This kernel of doctrine is presumably common Buddhism of the period before th great schisms of the fourth and third centuries BC. It may be substantially the Buddhism of the Buddha himself, although this cannot be proved: at any rate it is a Buddhism presupposed by the schools as existing about a hundred years after the parinirvana of the Buddha, and there is no evidence to suggest that it was formulated by anyone else than the Buddha and his immediate followers."[16]
  11. ^ Richard Gombrich: "I have the greatest difficulty in accepting that the main edifice is not the work of a single genius. By "the main edifice" I mean the collections of the main body of sermons, the four Nikāyas, and of the main body of monastic rules."[14]
  12. ^ Well-known proponents of the first position are A.K. Warder[note 10] and Richard Gombrich.[17][note 11]
  13. ^ Ronald Davidson: "While most scholars agree that there was a rough body of sacred literature (disputed)(sic) that a relatively early community (disputed)(sic) maintained and transmitted, we have little confidence that much, if any, of surviving Buddhist scripture is actually the word of the historic Buddha."[18]
  14. ^ A proponent of the second position is Ronald Davidson.[note 13]
  15. ^ Bronkhorst: "This position is to be preferred to (ii) for purely methodological reasons: only those who seek nay find, even if no success is guaranteed."[19]
  16. ^ Lopez: "The original teachings of the historical Buddha are extremely difficult, if not impossible, to recover or reconstruct."[20]
  17. ^ Well-known proponent of the third position are J.W. de Jong,[5][note 2] Johannes Bronkhorst[note 15] and Donald Lopez.[note 16]
  18. ^ See Louis de La Vallée Poussin, Musial and Narad]. Translated from the French by Gelongma Migme Chödrön and Gelong Lodrö Sangpo.
  19. ^ Sammyuta Nikaya 56:11
  20. ^ Majjhima Nikaya 26
  21. ^ Anguttara Nikaya II.45 (PTS)
  22. ^ Samyutta Nikaya III.140-142 (PTS)
  23. ^ See also:
    • Anderson (1999):[46] "The appearance of the four noble truths in the introduction, enlightenment, and gerundival sets in the Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta provide evidence for Norman's correct conclusion that the teaching was probably not part of the earliest version of the Sutta.[47]
    • Batchelor (2012): "In a 1992 paper entitled "The Four Noble Truths," Norman offers a detailed, philological analysis of The First Discourse, and arrives at the startling conclusion that "the earliest form of this sutta did not include the word ariya-saccaؐ (noble truth)" (Norman 2003: 223). On grammatical and syntactical grounds, he shows how the expression "noble truth" was inexpertly interpolated into the text at a later date than its original composition. But since no such original text has come down to us, we cannot know what it did say. All that can reasonably be deduced is that instead of talking of four noble truths, the text merely spoke of "four.""[48]
  24. ^ DN 10

References

  1. ^ a b c d Hurvitz 1976.
  2. ^ a b c Nakamura 1989.
  3. ^ a b c Hirakawa 1990.
  4. ^ Gombrich 1997, p. 11-12. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFGombrich1997 (help)
  5. ^ a b c Jong 1993, p. 25.
  6. ^ a b c d e f g h Warder 1999.
  7. ^ Gombrich 1997, p. 11 -12. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFGombrich1997 (help)
  8. ^ a b Cox 2004, p. 502.
  9. ^ a b Nakamura 1989, p. 57.
  10. ^ Warder 1999, p. 5.
  11. ^ a b c d e f Bronkhorst 1993. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBronkhorst1993 (help)
  12. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Vetter 1988. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  13. ^ Schmithausen 1990.
  14. ^ a b c d e Gombrich 1997. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFGombrich1997 (help)
  15. ^ Bronkhorst 1993, p. vii. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBronkhorst1993 (help)
  16. ^ a b Warder, 1999 & inside flap. Cite error: The named reference "FOOTNOTEWarder1999inside flap" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  17. ^ Bronkhorst 1997, p. viii.
  18. ^ Davidson 2003, p. 147.
  19. ^ Bronkhorst 1997, p. vii.
  20. ^ Lopez.
  21. ^ a b c bronkhorst 1993.
  22. ^ Bronkhorst 1993, p. 133-134. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBronkhorst1993 (help)
  23. ^ Schmithausen 1981. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFSchmithausen1981 (help)
  24. ^ Vetter 1988, p. xxi-xxii. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  25. ^ Vetter, 1988 & xxi-xxxvii.
  26. ^ a b c Vetter 1988, p. xxviii. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  27. ^ a b c Anderson 1999. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFAnderson1999 (help)
  28. ^ a b Bucknell 1984.
  29. ^ a b Vetter 1988, p. xxxiii. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  30. ^ Vetter 1988, p. xxvii. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  31. ^ Vetter 1988, p. xxx. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  32. ^ a b c d Norman 1997, p. 29.
  33. ^ gombrich 1997, p. 131.
  34. ^ Norman 1997, p. 30.
  35. ^ Vetter 1988, p. xxix, xxxi. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  36. ^ Bronkhorst 1993, p. 100-101. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBronkhorst1993 (help)
  37. ^ Bronkhorst 1993, p. 101. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBronkhorst1993 (help)
  38. ^ Vetter 1988, p. xxxiv-xxxvii. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  39. ^ Gombrich 1997, p. 131. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFGombrich1997 (help)
  40. ^ Gombrich 1997, p. 96-134. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFGombrich1997 (help)
  41. ^ a b c Vetter 1988, p. xxxv. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  42. ^ Vetter 1988, p. xxxvi. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  43. ^ Vetter 1988, p. xxxvi-xxxvii. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFVetter1988 (help)
  44. ^ Bucknell 1984, p. 11-12.
  45. ^ Norman 1992.
  46. ^ Anderson, 1999 & 17-20.
  47. ^ Anderson, 1999 & 20.
  48. ^ Batchelor 2012, p. 92.
  49. ^ Anderson 1999, p. viii. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFAnderson1999 (help)
  50. ^ Anderson 1999, p. 21. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFAnderson1999 (help)
  51. ^ Anderson 1999, p. 17. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFAnderson1999 (help)
  52. ^ Bronkhorst 1993, p. 99-100, 102-111. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBronkhorst1993 (help)
  53. ^ a b Bronkhorst 1993, p. 108. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBronkhorst1993 (help)
  54. ^ Bronkhorst 1993, p. 107. sfn error: multiple targets (2×): CITEREFBronkhorst1993 (help)
  55. ^ Warder 1999, p. 82.

Sources

Printed sources

  • Anderson, Carol (1999), Pain and Its Ending: The Four Noble Truths in the Theravada Buddhist Canon, Routledge
  • Batchelor, Stephen (2012), "A Secular Buddhism", Journal of Global Buddhism 13 (2012): 87-107
  • Bronkhorst, Johannes (1993), The Two Traditions Of Meditation In Ancient India, Motilal Banarsidass Publ.
  • Bucknell, Rod (1984), "The Buddhist to Liberation: An Analysis of the Listing of Stages", The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, Volume 7, 1984, Number 2
  • Buswell, Robert E. (2004), Encyclopedia of Buddhism, Macmillan
  • Cox, Collett (2004), Mainstream Buddhist Schools. In: Buswell (ed.), "MacMillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism", Macmillan
  • Davidson, Ronald M. (2003), Indian Esoteric Buddhism, Columbia University Press, ISBN 0-231-12618-2
  • Gombrich, Richard F. (1997), How Buddhism Began, Munshiram Manoharlal
  • Harrison, Paul (2004), Mahasamghika School. In: Buswell (ed.), "MacMillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism", Macmillan
  • Hirakawa (1990), History of Indian Buddhism, volume 1, Hawai'i University Press
  • Hurvitz, Leon (1976), Scripture of the Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma, Columbia University Press
  • Jong, J.W. de (1993), The Beginnings of Buddhism {{citation}}: Unknown parameter |jpurnal= ignored (help)
  • Lopez, Donald S. (1995), Buddhism in Practice (PDF), Princeton University Press
  • Nakamura (1989), Indian Buddhism, Motilal Banarsidas
  • Norman, K.R. (1992), The Four Noble Truths. In: "Collected Papers", vol 2:210-223, Pali Text Society, 2003
  • Norman, K.R. (1997), A Philological Approach to Buddhism. The Bukkyo Dendo Kybkai Lectures 1994 (PDF), School ofOriental and African Studies

(University of London) {{citation}}: line feed character in |publisher= at position 38 (help)

  • Schmithausen, Lambert (1981), On some Aspects of Descriptions or Theories of 'Liberating Insight' and 'Enlightenment' in Early Buddhism". In: Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus (Gedenkschrift für Ludwig Alsdorf), hrsg. von Klaus Bruhn und Albrecht Wezler, Wiesbaden 1981, 199-250
  • Vetter, Tilmann (1988), The Ideas and Meditative Practices of Early Buddhism, BRILL
  • Warder, A.K. (1999), Indian Buddhism, 3rd edition

Web-sources

  1. ^ Bhikkhu Sujato, Sects & Sectarianism. The origins of Buddhist Schools. Conclusion
  2. ^ Sister Vajira & Francis Story (trans.)(1998), "Maha-parinibbana Sutta: Last Days of the Buddha" (DN 10)

Further reading

History of Buddhism
  • Samuel, Geoffrey (2010), The Origins of Yoga and Tantra. Indic Religions to the Thirteenth Century, Cambridge University Press
Dhyana and liberating Insight
  • Schmithausen, Lambert (1981), On some Aspects of Descriptions or Theories of 'Liberating Insight' and 'Enlightenment' in Early Buddhism". In: Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus (Gedenkschrift für Ludwig Alsdorf), hrsg. von Klaus Bruhn und Albrecht Wezler, Wiesbaden 1981, 199-250
  • Vetter, Tilmann (1988), The Ideas and Meditative Practices of Early Buddhism, BRILL
  • Bronkhorst, Johannes (1993), The Two Traditions Of Meditation In Ancient India, Motilal Banarsidass Publ.
  • Gombrich, Richard F. (1997), How Buddhism Began, Munshiram Manoharlal
  • Anderson, Carol (1999), Pain and Its Ending: The Four Noble Truths in the Theravada Buddhist Canon, Routledge
Modern understanding
  • Cohen, Robert S. (2006), Beyond Enlightenment: Buddhism, Religion, Modernity, Routledge
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pre-sectarian_Buddhism&oldid=633499355"