From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The term pre-sectarian Buddhism is used by some
scholars[1] to
refer to the Buddhism that existed before the various subsects of
Buddhism came into being.[2] Other
terms that have been used to refer to this first period of Buddhism
are: the earliest Buddhism,[3][4]
original Buddhism[5] and
the Buddhism of the Buddha himself.[6] Some
Japanese scholars (such as Nakamura[7] and
Hirakawa[8])
use the term Early Buddhism to refer to this first period
of Buddhism, and refer to the subsequent period of the Early Buddhist Schools as sectarian
Buddhism.[8]
Pre-sectarian Buddhism refers to Buddhism in the period between the first
discourse of Gautama Buddha until the first enduring
split in the Sangha, which
occurred (according to most scholars) between the second Buddhist council and the
third Buddhist council.[9
] The late Professor Hirakawa however, places the
first schism after the death of King Asoka.[10]
Professor Schopen questions whether there ever was a unified
Buddhism which split into sects.[11]
Pre-sectarian Buddhism is the Buddhism presupposed by the early
Buddhist schools as existing about one hundred years after the
Parinirvana of the
Buddha. Most
scholars do agree that there was a rough body of sacred literature
that a relatively early community maintained and transmitted.[12] This
may be substantially the Buddhism of the Buddha himself, although
this cannot be proved. According to Professor A.K. Warder, there is
no evidence to suggest that it was formulated by anyone other than
the Buddha and his immediate followers[13].
Prof. Ronald Davidson however has little confidence that much, if
any, of surviving Buddhist scripture is actually the word of the
historical Buddha.[14]
Sources on Pre-sectarian
Buddhism
The information on Buddhism in the period before the rise of the
early Buddhist schools is based
on accounts of Buddha's life and teachings in the scriptures of the
Theravadin Pali Canon, and the surviving portions of
the scriptures of Sarvastivada, Mulasarvastivada, Mahisasaka, Dharmaguptaka and
other schools, most of which are only available in a Chinese
translation. Some individual scriptures found in Nepal, however,
are composed in Sanskrit.
Recently 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.[15] The
accounts in these individual scriptures might be tainted by the
particular philosophies of those schools or by translation issues.
However, since various recensions of these texts (from various
schools) are available, comparisons can be made, and conclusions
drawn, to filter out the most obvious of these taints.[16]
Comparing the various scriptures, it is even possible to uncover
certain features of early Buddhism (and its environment) that the
traditions themselves have forgotten about.[17]
Opinions of
scholars
The earliest phase of scriptures, recognized by nearly all
scholars (the main exception is Dr Gregory Schopen), is based on a
comparison of the Pali Canon with the Chinese Agamas and other surviving portions of
other early canons. Some scholars consider that this rough common
core of the scriptures of the different schools gives a
substantially correct picture of the original teachings of the
Buddha. This core is identified as the four main nikayas of the Sutta Pitaka (the Digha Nikaya, Majjhima
Nikaya, Samyutta Nikaya and Anguttara
Nikaya), together with the main body of monastic rules[18], the
Vinaya Pitaka.
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.[19]
Another body of scholars consider that the question has not been
settled one way or another.[20] This
last group includes those scholars who claim it is impossible to
ever know the teachings of the Buddha, an attitude which has been
criticized by Warder to be one of 'extreme caution'.[21]
Buddhism during
the lifetime of Gautama Buddha
Pre-sectarian Buddhism was a changing form of Buddhism, with Gautama Buddha
defining and refining the proper behavior for monks[22] (Vinaya), with the help of monks
like Upali.[23] The
rules were frequently amended to allow for certain (harmless) kinds
of behavior which was forbidden in a previous version of the
rule.
The Pre-sectarian Buddhist monks' order grew from a small unknown order of
highly dedicated monks (in the year after the attainment of
Nirvana) to a large, well-established and well-known order, which
needed more formalities and more rules to uphold the correct teachings
and discipline.[24] It
was relatively sober[25] and
the monks were not supposed to go to public festivals (number 7 of
the ten precepts), and were expected to
refrain from activities such as playing[26] and
dancing.[27] The
monks were not allowed to show off their supernatural
abilities.[28] They
were also not allowed to use or receive money,[29] in
order to lead a simple life of contentment.
In the beginning the order of monks (Sangha) did not have any monasteries, but
already in its first year the Buddha allowed these to be given,
after being asked to do so by King Bimbisara.[30] Many
of the these monasteries were based in parks or forests, for
example Veluvana, Jetavana
and Nigrodharama.
One of the buildings given was a very well-furnished building,
comparable to a palace, called the Migaramatupasada.[31]
The Buddha, as the leader and main teacher, was the one who
decided on the rules to be followed,[32] but
the executive power lay with the monastic community as a
whole.[33]
Buddha forbade the monastic community to make their own rules[34] and
gave instructions for the monks to still follow his teaching (doctrine and
discipline) after his
death.[35] Thus,
He did not appoint a successor [36][37][38][39] to
have legislative power over the Sangha and the monks. He gave limited powers to
the Sangha to unanimously
agree to not follow the 'lesser and minor' rules.[40]
After the Buddha's
paranirvana
At the first Buddhist council the
Sangha unanimously agreed to continue following all the rules laid
down by Buddha, to prevent any major rules (pacittiya or higher) to
be classified as a minor rule and thus be put aside.[41]
The second Buddhist council took
place about 100 years after the Parinibbana of the
Buddha. It was convened to decide on the subject of discipline or
Vinaya, and dealt with whether
it was allowed to follow adapted rules, thus disregarding the
instructions of Gautama Buddha. The adapted rules were
integrated within the larger framework of correct procedures, and
the offending monks refused to acknowledge their fault. For this
reason a council was convened, in which the issue was
satisfactorily dealt with, in that the offending monks abandoned
their old habits.[42]
Shortly after the second Buddhist council the first long-lasting
schisms
occurred in the Sangha. The second Buddhist council is sometimes
considered to be the origin of these schisms,[43] but
no direct evidence for this is apparent.[44] The
first post-schismatic groups are often stated to be the Sthaviravada and the
Mahasanghika.[9
]
Later
elaborations on the original teachings
After the Sangha split into the various early
Buddhist schools and the Mahayana, various new doctrines, scriptures
and practices arose, composed and developed by monks, concerning
issues deemed important at the time.[45]
During the time of Pre-sectarian Buddhism, these later elaborations
on the teachings had not yet come into existence, and were not part
of the established teaching and practice of Buddhism.
In later times, the arguments between the various schools were
based in these newly introduced teachings, practices and beliefs,
and monks sought to validate these newly introduced teachings and
concepts by referring to the older texts (Sutta-pitaka and Vinaya-pitaka). Most often, the various new
Abhidhamma and Mahayana teachings were bases for arguments
between sects.
Newly
composed scriptures
Some scholars state that unintentional literalism was a major
force for change in the early doctrinal history of Buddhism. This
means that texts were interpreted paying too much attention to the
precise words used and not enough to the speaker's intention, the
spirit of the text. Some later doctrinal developments in the early
Buddhist schools show scholastic literalism, which is a tendency to
take the words and phrases of earlier texts (maybe the Buddha's own
words) in such a way as to read in distinctions which it was never
intended to make.[46]
The following (later) Buddhist scriptures were not existent, or
in a very early (insignificant) stage of development:
Abhidhamma
As the last major division of the canon, the Abhidhamma Pitaka
has had a checkered history. It was not accepted as canonical by
the Mahasanghika school[47][48] and
several other schools[49].
Another school included most of the Khuddaka Nikaya within the Abhidhamma
Pitaka[47].
Also, the Pali version of the Abhidhamma is a strictly Theravada
collection, and has little in common with the Abhidhamma works
recognized by other Buddhist schools[50]. The
various Abhidhamma philosophies of the various early schools have
no agreement on doctrine[51
] and belong to the period of 'Divided
Buddhism'[51
] (as opposed to Undivided Buddhism). The earliest
texts of the Pali Canon (the Sutta Nipata and parts of the Jataka),
together with the first four (and early) Nikayas of the Suttapitaka, have no mention of (the texts
of) the Abhidhamma Pitaka[52
]. The Abhidhamma is also not mentioned at the
report of the First Buddhist
Council, directly after the death of the Buddha. This report of
the first council does mention the existence of the Vinaya and the five Nikayas (of
the Suttapitaka)[53][54].
Although the literature of the various Abhidhamma
Pitakas begun as a kind of commentarial supplement upon the
earlier teachings in the Suttapitaka, it soon led to new doctrinal
and textual developments and became the focus of a new form of
scholarly monastic life.[55] The
various Abhidhamma works were starting to be composed from about
200 years after the passing away of the Buddha.[56]
Traditionally, it is believed (in Theravadin culture) that the
Abhidhamma was taught by Buddha to his late mother who was living
in Tusita
heaven. However, this is rejected by scholars, who believe that
only small parts of the Abhidhamma literature may have been
existent in a very early form.[57] Some
schools of Buddhism had important disagreements on subjects of
Abhidhamma, while having a largely similar Sutta-pitaka and
Vinaya-pitaka. The arguments and conflicts between them were thus
often on matters of philosophical Abhidhammic origin, not on
matters concerning the actual words and teachings of Buddha.
One impetus for composing new scriptures like the Adhidhammas of
the various schools, according to some scholars, was that Buddha
left no clear statement about the ontological status of
the world - about what really exists.[58]
Subsequently, later Buddhists have themselves defined what exists
and what not (in the Abhidhammic scriptures), leading to
disagreements.
Parts of the Khuddaka
Nikaya
Oliver Abeynayake has the following to say on the dating of the
various books in the Khuddaka Nikaya:
- ‘The Khuddaka Nikaya can easily be divided into two strata, one
being early and the other late. The texts Sutta Nipata, Itivuttaka, Dhammapada, Therigatha (Theragatha), Udana, and Jataka tales belong to the early stratum.
The texts Khuddakapatha, Vimanavatthu, Petavatthu, Niddesa,
Patisambhida, Apadana, Buddhavamsa and Cariyapitaka can be
categorized in the later stratum.’[59]
The texts in the early stratum date from before the second
council (earlier than 100 years after Buddha’s parinibbana), while
the later stratum is from after the second council, which means
they are definitely later additions to the Sutta Pitaka, and that
they might not have been the original teachings by the Buddha, but
later compositions by disciples.
The following books of the Khuddaka Nikaya can thus be regarded
as later additions:
The original verses of the Jatakas are recognized as the
earliest part of the Canon[52
], but the accompanying (and more famous) Jataka
Stories are purely commentarial, an obvious later addition.
Parivara
The Parivara, the last
book of the Vinaya
Pitaka, is a later addition to the Vinaya Pitaka[60].
Other later
writings
Newly
introduced concepts
Some Buddhist concepts that were not existent in the time of
pre-sectarian Buddhism are:
See also
Notes
- ^
for example: ... 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). Scripture of the
Lotus Blossom of the Fine Dharma, Leon Kurvitz, 1976, Columbia
University Press (quote via Google Scholar search-engine)
- ^
sectsandsectarianism -
Conclusion
- ^
The Earliest Buddhism,’’ How Buddhism Began, Richard F.
Gombrich, Munshiram Manoharlal, 1997, p. 11
-12
- ^
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. J.W. De
Jong, 1993: The Beginnings of Buddhism, in The Eastern
Buddhist, vol. 26, no. 2, p. 25
- ^ a
reconstruction of the original Buddhism presupposed by the
traditions of the different schools known to us. AK Warder, Indian
Buddhism, 1999, 3rd edition.
- ^
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, A. K. Warder, Indian
Buddhism, 1999, 3rd edition.
- ^
Indian Buddhism, Japan, 1980, reprinted Motilal, Delhi,
1987, 1989, table of contents
- ^ a
b
History of Indian Buddhism, volume 1, Shinjūsha, Tokyo,
1974, English translation Hawai'i University Press, Honolulu,
1990,
- ^ a
b
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.”,
MacMillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004, page 502
- ^
History of Indian Buddhism, volume 1, Shinjūsha, Tokyo,
1974, English translation Hawai'i University Press, Honolulu, 1990,
page 94: Thus serious disputes arose within the early Buddhist
order's monks before Aśoka's reign, but the order did not actually
split into schools until after Aśoka's death.
- ^
Journal of the Pali Text Society, volume XVI, page 105:
...almost everything "church historians" and sociologists have
discovered: if uniformity is ever achieved it is achieved over more
or less long periods of time through a complex process ... that
works on originally discrete and competing groups and
voices.
- ^
Prof. Ronald Davidson states, "most scholars agree that there was a
rough body of sacred literature (disputed) that a relatively early
community (disputed) maintained and transmitted." Davidson, Ronald
M. Indian Esoteric Buddhism. pg 147. Columbia University
Press, 2003. ISBN 0231126182.
- ^
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, AK Warder, Indian Buddhism, 1999, 3rd edition,
inside flap.
- ^
Prof. Ronald Davidson states, "we have little confidence that much,
if any, of surviving Buddhist scripture is actually the word of the
historical Buddha'" Davidson, Ronald M. Indian Esoteric
Buddhism. pg 147. Columbia University Press, 2003. ISBN
0231126182.
- ^
‘’ 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.’’ AK Warder,
Indian Buddhism, 1999, 3rd edition, p.5
- ^
On the basis of the available sources it is possible to
reconstruct a fairly reliable biography of the man who was to
become the Buddha. The sources are the canonical texts of the
Theravada, the Sarvastivada, Mulasarvastivada, and the
Dharmaguptaka traditions., MacMillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism,
2004, page 82; however, some scholars hold a diametrically opposed
view: we know next to nothing about the Buddha as a
person, Gombrich, Theravada Buddhism, Routledge, London, 1988,
page 20
- ^
This proves that 'the earliest Buddhism' has interesting
features which we can uncover but which the later Buddhist
tradition had forgotten about’’, How Buddhism Began, Richard F.
Gombrich, Munshiram Manoharlal, 1997, p. 12
- ^
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, Gombrich, loc.
cit.
- ^
See Nakamura, Indian Buddhism, originally published in Japan, 1980,
reprinted by Motilal Vanarsidass, Delhi, for one such theory:
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, page 57
- ^
The original teachings of the historical Buddha are extremely
difficult, if not impossible, to recover or reconstruct,
Lopez, Buddhism in Practice, Princeton University Press, 1995, page
4
- ^
‘’in the name of that extreme caution which some suppose to be the
hallmark of the sound academic, some scholars have claimed that we
do not know what the Buddha taught and cannot now find out.’’ AK
Warder, Indian Buddhism, 1999, 3rd edition, preface to 1st
edition.
- ^
the Buddha did not set out a full code at once. Instead, he
formulated rules one at a time, in response to events.,
Introduction: Dhamma-Vinaya, The Buddhist Monastic Code I,
Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 1994.
- ^
the Buddha speaks in high praise of Ven. Upali, the foremost of
his bhikkhu disciples in terms of his knowledge of Vinaya, who was
responsible for teaching the rules to the other bhikkhus and who
was largely responsible for the shape of the Vinaya as we now have
it., Introduction: Dhamma-Vinaya, The Buddhist Monastic Code
I, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 1994.
- ^
But when the Community has become large, ... possesses great
material gains ... great status ... has a large body of learning
... is long-standing, then there are cases where the conditions
that offer a foothold for the effluents arise in the Community, and
the Teacher then lays down a training rule for his disciples so as
to counteract those very conditions..., Buddha, in the
Bhaddali Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 65. quoted in: Introduction: Dhamma
Vinaya, Buddhist Monastic Code I, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, 1996
- ^
There are three things, O Bhikkhus, which when they
characterize a Bhikkhu, the Sangha, if it likes, should carry out
the Act of Banishment against him; (that is to say), when he is
characterized by frivolity of action - when he is characterized by
frivolity of speech - when he is characterized by frivolity both of
action and of speech. These are the three things, O Bhikkhus
(&c., as before, down to) against him. Chapter 14, First
Khandhaka, Cullavagga, Vinaya Pitaka.
- ^
for example: Pacittiya 53 of Theravadin Patimokkha
- ^
for a list of various unacceptable kinds of behavior for monks
(including dancing), see Chapter 13, First Khandhaka, Cullavagga,
Vinaya Pitaka
- ^
Vin.ii.110f.
- ^
Nissaggiya Pacittiyas 18, 19 and 20 of the Theravadin Patimokkha.
Similar rules exists in all known Patimokkhas.
- ^
(Vin.i.39f)
- ^
see DhA.i.413
- ^
and the Teacher then lays down a training rule for his
disciples so as to counteract those very conditions...,
Buddha, in the Bhaddali Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 65.
- ^
If, O Bhikkhus, an act is lawful and performed by a complete
congregation - such an act, O Bhikkhus, is unobjectionable and
valid on account of its lawfulness and of the completeness (of the
congregation). Such an act, O Bhikkhus, ought to be performed, and
such an act is allowed by me. 'Therefore, O Bhikkhus, you ought to
train yourselves thus: "Lawful acts which are performed by
complete congregations--such acts will we perform." - Buddha,
concerning decisions made by the Sangha, which should be made with
every monk present (or having sent his consent), and according to
the instructions or rules laid down by Buddha (lawfulness). Chapter
2, 9th Khandhaka, Cullavagga, Vinaya Pitaka
- ^
see the account of Upasena, who was praised by Buddha after defying
a pacittiya offence newly made by the local
Sangha: Vin.iii.230ff
- ^
"Ānanda, it may be that you would think: ‘Gone is the Teacher’s
word! We have no teacher.’ It should not be seen thus, Ānanda, for
the Dhamma [the Teaching] and the Vinaya [the Discipline] that I
have taught and explained to you, will, at my passing, be your
teacher..., Buddha, Mahaparinibbana Sutta, Digha Nikaya
16
- ^
Not even to Sariputta or Moggallana would I hand over the Order,
Buddha, Vin.ii.188
- ^
Buddhist Sects in India, Nalinaksha Dutt, Motilal Banararsidass
Publishers (Delhi), 2nd Edition, 1978, Page 39-40.
- ^
Pali Dictionary of Proper Names, by Malalasekera, entry on
‘Vassakara’.
- ^
An original source can be found, amongst others, in the Gopaka
Moggallána Sutta (Majjhima Nikaya, Sutta Pitaka).
- ^
Ānanda, after my passing, the order may, if it wishes, abrogate
the lesser and minor rules. Buddha, Mahaparinibbana Sutta,
Digha Nikaya 16
- ^
If the time seems appropriate to the Sangha, not ordaining what
has not been ordained, and not revoking what has been ordained, let
it take upon itself and ever direct itself in the precepts
according as they have been laid down. This is the resolution.
Maha Kassapa, during the First Buddhist Council at Rajagaha, 11th
Khandhaka of the Cullavagga, Vinaya Pitaka.
- ^
Twelfth Khandaka, Cullavagga, Vinaya Pitaka
- ^
The Mahasamghika school is believed to have emerged from the
first major schism in the Buddhist order, at a council held in the
fourth century B.C.E., more than a century after Gautama’s death.
The name, from mahasamgha, “great(er) community,” supposedly
reflects the Mahasamghikas’ superior numbers, the Sthaviras being
the minority party to the dispute., MacMillan Encyclopedia of
Buddhism, 2004, page 490
- ^
the actual circumstances for the first schism remain obscure
and tied to other roughly contemporaneous events that later
traditions connect with possibly three additional early
councils., MacMillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004, page
502
- ^
By several centuries after the death of the Buddha, the
itinerant mendicants following his way had formed settled
communities and had changed irrevocably their received methods of
both teaching and praxis. These changes were inevitable, a
consequence of the growth and geographic dispersion of the
practicing communities. Confronted with new challenges and
opportunities in an increasingly organized institutional setting,
monks expanded and elaborated both doctrine and disciplinary codes,
created new textual genres, developed new forms of religious
praxis, and eventually divided into numerous sects or
schools., MacMillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004, page
501
- ^
‘’I would also argue that unintentional literalism has been a major
force for change in the early doctrinal history of Buddhism. Texts
have been interpreted with too much attention to the precise words
used and not enough to the speaker's intention, the spirit of the
text. In particular I see in some doctrinal developments what I
call scholastic literalism, which is a tendency to take the words
and phrases of earlier texts (maybe the Buddha's own words) in such
a way as to read in distinctions which it was never intended to
make.’’ How Buddhism Began, Richard F. Gombrich, Munshiram
Manoharlal, 1997, p. 21-22
- ^ a
b
"Abhidhamma Pitaka." Encyclopædia Britannica. Ultimate Reference
Suite. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2008.
- ^
Buddhist Sects in India, Nalinaksha Dutt, 1978, page 58
- ^
several schools rejected the authority of abhidharma and
claimed that abhidharma treatises were composed by fallible, human
teachers. in: Macmillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism
(2004), page 2. (A similar statement can be found on pages 112 and
756.)
- ^
"Buddhism." Encyclopædia Britannica. Ultimate Reference Suite.
Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2008.
- ^
a
b Kanai Lal Hazra, Pali Language and
Literature - A Systematic Survey and Historical Survey, 1994, Vol.
1, page 415
- ^
a
b Kanai Lal Hazra, Pali Language and
Literature - A Systematic Survey and Historical Survey, 1994, Vol.
1, page 412
- ^
I.B. Horner, Book of the Discipline, Volume 5, page 398
- ^
The Mahisasaka Account of the First Council mentions the four
agamas here. see http://santifm1.0.googlepages.com/thefirstcouncil(mahisasakaversion)
- ^
Although begun as a pragmatic method of elaborating the
received teachings, this scholastic enterprise soon led to new
doctrinal and textual developments and became the focus of a new
form of scholarly monastic life., MacMillan Encyclopedia of
Buddhism, 2004, page 1
- ^
Independent abhidharma treatises were composed over a period of
at least seven hundred years (ca. third or second centuries B.C.E.
to fifth century C.E.)., MacMillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism,
2004, page 2
- ^
These similarities (between the Abhidhammas of the various
schools) suggest either contact among the groups who composed and
transmitted these texts, or a common ground of doctrinal exegesis
and even textual material predating the emergence of the separate
schools., MacMillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004, page
2
- ^
‘’ If I am right in thinking that the Buddha left no clear
statement about the ontological status of the world - about what
'really' exists - this would explain how later Buddhists could
disagree about this question.’’ How Buddhism Began, Richard F.
Gombrich, Munshiram Manoharlal, 1997, p. 34
- ^
A textual and Historical Analysis of the Khuddaka Nikaya – Oliver
Abeynayake Ph.D. , Colombo, First Edition – 1984, p. 113.
- ^
This work (the Parivara) is in fact a very much later
composition, and probably the work of a Ceylonese Thera. from:
Book of the Discipline, volume VI, page ix (translators'
introduction)
- ^
would throw the earliest phase of this literature (the Mahayana
Sutras) back to about the beginning of the common era.,
Macmillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004, page 493
- ^
Theravada Buddhism, in texts such as Cariyapitaka, Buddhavamsa, and Dhammapadatthakatha,
postulates the following ten perfections, Macmillan
Encyclopedia of Buddhism, 2004, page 632
- ^
‘It is evident that the Hinayanists, either to popularize their
religion or to interest the laity more in it, incorporated in their
doctrines the conception of Bodhisattva and the practice of
paramitas. This was effected by the production of new literature:
the Jatakas and Avadanas.' Buddhist Sects in India, Nalinaksha
Dutt, Motilal Banararsidass Publishers (Delhi), 2nd Edition, 1978,
p. 251. The term 'Semi-Mahayana' occurs here as a subtitle.
References
- Encyclopedia of Buddhism.
Macmillan. 2004.
- Thanissaro, Bhikkhu (1996). The
Buddhist Monastic Code I.
- Thanissaro, Bhikkhu (2002). The
Buddhist Monastic Code II.
External
links
Wikis
Quiz
Map
Search
