Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by Alex123 »

Hello all.

I was reading a bit of Agamas. I wonder, why did they have different suttas with sometimes different stories?
Why didn't all/most of early schools use the SAME sutta-pitaka that was formed during 1st council? I understand that translation into different languages, maybe loss of some suttas, would slightly alter some words, etc. But create different suttas... Why?

At least it seems like Teaching in general (in those Agamas that were translated and I've read) is the same.


:namaste:
Dhammapardon
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon May 09, 2022 12:11 am

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by Dhammapardon »

The Buddha did speak of his teachings like a handful of leaves among a forest.

For example, lots of his teachings are similes. This leads one to believe there are other similes that can come about which could be an acceptable teaching as well.

There are also sutta where the words spoken inspire the listener to speak. Those spoken words are also included within the sutta. Even included and framed in a way that appears to be a sort of "junior teaching" from the student within the teaching.

I enjoy the idea of a sort of living and evolving manual.
Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its wings as its only burden; so too is he content with a set of robes to provide for his body and almsfood to provide for his hunger. Wherever he goes, he takes only his barest necessities along. This is how a monk is content.(DN11)
TRobinson465
Posts: 1782
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by TRobinson465 »

Alex123 wrote: Sun Mar 26, 2023 4:22 pm Hello all.

I was reading a bit of Agamas. I wonder, why did they have different suttas with sometimes different stories?
Why didn't all/most of early schools use the SAME sutta-pitaka that was formed during 1st council? I understand that translation into different languages, maybe loss of some suttas, would slightly alter some words, etc. But create different suttas... Why?

At least it seems like Teaching in general (in those Agamas that were translated and I've read) is the same.


:namaste:
I honestly dont think they meant to in most cases. It just happened. Telephone effect, translations of translations of translations, etc. As for creating differnt suttas, how do you know they created different suttas? maybe it was a real sutta and theravada was the one who lost it.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by DNS »

TRobinson465 wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:25 am I honestly dont think they meant to in most cases. It just happened. Telephone effect, translations of translations of translations, etc. As for creating differnt suttas, how do you know they created different suttas? maybe it was a real sutta and theravada was the one who lost it.
I was thinking the same thing. There were 18 early buddhist schools. Theravada is just one of those and happens to have the best records kept. It has the most complete (known) Canon of any of the early buddhist schools. For the others, we only have fragments here and there of their suttas (afaik).

What if one of those other early buddhist schools had it right and it's Theravada that got it wrong? :stirthepot:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Buddhist_schools

Until we figure it all out with insight and awakening, in the meantime we can look for the early texts and commonalities found in the known early texts.
https://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?ti ... Pali_Canon
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

I'm inclined to agree with the above responses from TRobinson and DNS.

Alex - do you believe the variations were intentional, deliberate and motivated? (Don't worry, I won't lambast you if you do... I'm just curious to see what you think, having now considered those two perspectives).

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by Alex123 »

retrofuturist wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 6:12 pm Greetings,

I'm inclined to agree with the above responses from TRobinson and DNS.

Alex - do you believe the variations were intentional, deliberate and motivated? (Don't worry, I won't lambast you if you do... I'm just curious to see what you think, having now considered those two perspectives).

Metta,
Paul. :)
I really don't know what happened. I can understand if there was one canon from which other schools broke off and minor variations were present (ie this or that name or place is different, few more or less paragraphs missing, inaccuracies in translations, transmission).

But the difference in Agamas (in form, but not in general/ major content) makes me wonder if I was right in trying to treat most suttas as historical accounts.

Maybe there is a difference between "sutta" and what we know as "such and such discourse sutta".
From what I understand, a sutta/sutra is supposed to be very short terse concise statement. More like Abhidhamma paragraph, rather than Discourses that we know. Not page or more long discourse with stories, marvellous events, explanations, etc. Ever read Yoga Sutras of Patanjali as an example of what sutra/sutta is? So the small suttas seem to be fairly identical. So in that sense they are the same. Maybe historical accuracy, for whatever reason, wasn't important to compilers.

It would be awesome beyond belief if there was some sort of recording-time-machine that could show us how the Buddha really looked like (all the drawings that I've seen show him with full head of hair, something He wasn't supposed to have), what language(s)/dialects He really spoke, and how things historically really unfolded.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Alex,
Alex123 wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 9:41 pm It would be awesome beyond belief if there was some sort of recording-time-machine that could show us how the Buddha really looked like (all the drawings that I've seen show him with full head of hair, something He wasn't supposed to have), what language(s)/dialects He really spoke, and how things historically really unfolded.
Yes, that would be cool.

For now I think it is sufficient to know that doctrinally, there is no meaningful difference between the Suttas and Agamas, and the existence of one helps to affirm the authenticity of the other.

Whether the Buddha walked from one town to the next or flew via the jhana express is neither here nor there.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by Alex123 »

Greetings Paul,
retrofuturist wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 9:58 pm For now I think it is sufficient to know that doctrinally, there is no meaningful difference between the Suttas and Agamas, and the existence of one helps to affirm the authenticity of the other.
Yes, that is a big plus. At least something positive. :smile:


:namaste:
thomaslaw
Posts: 808
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by thomaslaw »

In Vinaya, Cullavagga (Vin. II, PTS, p. 139), the Buddha advises bhikkhus not to use Vedic language (Chanda; i.e. Vedic Sanskrit) for the Buddha’s language/teachings (buddhavacana), but use your own language (sakāya niruttiyā 'based on your own language') for the Buddha’s teachings.

So, there are now different textual languages for the teachings and stories in Early Buddhism.
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by asahi »

create different suttas... Why?

Because monks came from different backgrounds . Eg some are strong believers of atman brahman , how they thinks determined what they transmit . The problem not lies in agama or nikaya but lies in some of the texts corrupted due to different and wrong understanding of the dhamma .
Then they are other ascetics of different faith sneaked in to destroy buddhism and to spread their own teachings .
No bashing No gossiping
thomaslaw
Posts: 808
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by thomaslaw »

Early Buddhist Texts (such as the principal four Nikayas/Agamas) were in fact not established at once in complete structure (form) and content at the first Buddhist council.

The principal four Nikayas/Agamas were gradually developed and expanded from Samyutta-nikaya (SN)/Samyukta-agama (SA), according to Ven. YinShun. https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/ve ... hism/22540

The extant SA and SN, and also other Agamas/Nikayas, are sectarian texts. One can seek an understanding of early Buddhist teachings by studying them comparatively.

Nevertheless, the major early Buddhist teachings are shared in common in the extant SA and SN; e.g. see the following book by Choong Mun-keat:

The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A Comparative Study Based on the Sūtrāṅga portion of the Pāli Saṃyutta-Nikāya and the Chinese Saṃyuktāgama (Series: Beitrage zur Indologie Band 32; Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden, 2000).

The particular collection of the Pali SN and the Chinese SA is mainly about knowing and seeing the four noble truths, the notion of anicca, dukkha, suñña (empty), anatta, and the middle way, which all are the core teachings of Early Buddhism.
:reading: :buddha1:
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by frank k »

interesting example:
in MN 140,
https://lucid24.org/mn/mn140/index.html#
16 – (conclusion: Pukkusāti wants to ordain)
16.2 – (he get gored by a bull)
16.4 – (Buddha announces he was reborn in pure abodes as non returner)

In the agama version, MA 162
https://lucid24.org/agama/ma/bdk/v3/index.html
he attains the dharma eye (stream entry)
and doesn't die.

My guess?
The theravada ending was made up, much like angulimala was probably made up or exaggerated to make a more dramatic story and symbol for redemption (one can still become an arhat after killing 1000 people in this life).
Getting gored to death by a cow just when you met the Buddha and had the opportunity to become an arhant easily, is probably made up to make the point that death can come at any time, we have to practice every moment.

I didn't read MA 162 slowly, carefully, in detail, I just scanned it quickly and saw in broad strokes, it seems to match all the parts of MN 140 pretty closely.

If the MN 140 version fatality for our hero was true, it's quite a memorable and unique event, it would be hard to forget and confuse with just being a stream enterer at the conclusion (MA 162). I can't see how the agama school would forget such a memorable event, so either the text got lost, truncated, or abbreviated in a way they lost the details in the reconstruction.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
TRobinson465
Posts: 1782
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by TRobinson465 »

frank k wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 4:11 pm interesting example:
in MN 140,
https://lucid24.org/mn/mn140/index.html#
16 – (conclusion: Pukkusāti wants to ordain)
16.2 – (he get gored by a bull)
16.4 – (Buddha announces he was reborn in pure abodes as non returner)

In the agama version, MA 162
https://lucid24.org/agama/ma/bdk/v3/index.html
he attains the dharma eye (stream entry)
and doesn't die.

Yes there's many accounts that tell very different stories about the same people. Uppalavanna being a prostitute b4 a Bhikkhuni in dharmaguptika texts and literally being a virgin b4 becoming a Bhikkhuni in Theravada texts for instance. There's definitely a reason the Buddha said in the kalama sutta not to believe in something just because it's written down in your scriptures. It's a huge folly to think record keeping in the preindustrial era and prior to the invention of the most primitive printing press was anywhere near as accurate as in the modern age.

It's like people who think they are morally superior to Abraham Lincoln since he didn't believe blacks and whites are equals. Or that the Buddha was sexist for saying things about women that don't line up exactly with third wave feminism that only occured in the past 60 years in the West.

Like DNS said. We cannot know the true Dhamma by study, we can only know by direct attainment thru practice. Even if the texts were flawlessly accurate, the Buddha never speaks highly of scholar only monks. In every story about scholar only monks they are portrayed negatively compared to those who practice diligently.

There is value in reading the texts so we know the direction, but they are not infallible. Even the "EBTs" are not perfect records of the Buddha's word. It is not likely that the EBTs are the "only" things the Buddha taught, but it's also nonsensical to think that any early Buddhist school has a flawless record of the canon from the first Buddhist council. All versions of the canon probably have some kind of texts that were altered, mistranslated, copied wrong, lost, or added.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by Alex123 »

TRobinson465 wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:18 pm Yes there's many accounts that tell very different stories about the same people. Uppalavanna being a prostitute b4 a Bhikkhuni in dharmaguptika texts and literally being a virgin b4 becoming a Bhikkhuni in Theravada texts for instance.
Could there have been multiple nuns (or monks) with the same name?
TRobinson465
Posts: 1782
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm
Location: United States

Re: Why did other early schools alter the Canon?

Post by TRobinson465 »

Alex123 wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 8:53 pm
TRobinson465 wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 6:18 pm Yes there's many accounts that tell very different stories about the same people. Uppalavanna being a prostitute b4 a Bhikkhuni in dharmaguptika texts and literally being a virgin b4 becoming a Bhikkhuni in Theravada texts for instance.
Could there have been multiple nuns (or monks) with the same name?
Sure. That happened even within the texts of the same school. People have the same name all the time. That's probably another reason some texts differ from another as compilers simply got confused. Although there was only one uppalavanna who was the chief nun of the buddha. In Theravada the prostitute story exists as well, but uppalavanna merely tells the story, there's no indication of it being autobiographical. In that case I'd just say it was a confusion on the part of the dharmaguptika canon compilers that they wrongly classified the story uppalavanna told as being about her. That or Theravada wrongly classified the story of her life as merely being a story she told
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama

"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
Post Reply