Freelance:Freelance ExBuddhist wrote:To answer the direct question ("So, are they authentic or not?") that, frankly, the video seems to dance around, but not really answer:
(1) Here's a substantive explanation in the form of a long essay (in both Chinese and English, parallel), contrasting the extant texts we've got from various traditions, and explaining that the Sutta material fom the Pali canon is, indeed, the best (extant) material we've got to work with (contrary to a lot of innuendo about Sanskrit and Chinese sources during the last hundred years, some of which seemed reasonable at an earlier stage of research, but now must be discarded).
http://a-bas-le-ciel.blogspot.tw/2014/0 ... inese.html
(2) And, by contrast, here's a lightweight youtube video that only lasts a few minutes, and will answer the same question (without too much depth, and geared, partly, to as a reply the type of hostililty that Mahayanists frequently present, i.e., in refusing to accept that there is any historical validity to the Pali Canon):
http://youtu.be/GzOcSpxKVoA
Thanks to you for your investment in the Pali language and the texts. While reasonable men and women can disagree over aspects of the Pali Canon, it is always of great value to have scholars contribute timely articles to the limited body of Pali textual interpretation. Your blog is terribly interesting: http://a-bas-le-ciel.blogspot.ca/2012/0 ... icity.html and I recommend it to anyone looking for another scholarly voice to add to their library of educated and cutting edge resources.