Wouldn't it have been easier for the non-Theravada schools to bring attention to the fact that the Theravada were smuggling in a whole, huge, fake addition to what was recited at the first council. Wouldn't that alone have sunk the Theravada: why try to match the Theravada in such wholesale deception?retrofuturist wrote: ↑Wed Jun 16, 2021 5:11 am
- My sense is that a lot of the schools who set about making their own Abhidhammas and commentaries did so because they wanted to be the ones to "own" the definitive interpretation of the Buddhavacana discourses, which they had all inherited. This is why only a sect that had prepared its own sectarian doctrine would also be the only one to preserve it, and hence why the Theravada Abhidhamma and commentaries exist only within Theravada - nowhere else.
Metta,
Paul.
Also if this Abhidhamma was only recited at the third council, that must mean all those Theravada monks at the council over 2250 years must have been in on this massive deception. Mahinda must have known he was bringing a fake basket to Sri Lanka. This suggests the 3rd council was manned by truly obtuse or even lying monks.