Sutta organization/arrangement/format questions

[Alex123]

Hello all,

Why are the sutta arranged in what seems to me to be unsystematic order?
For example:
in Digha Nikaya, why is Parinibbana sutta #16 (out of 34) and not the LAST sutta? Wouldn't that be a more logical place for it? The only exception would be suttas dealing with the time when the Buddha was gone, but those are in the Majjhima Nikaya.

Wouldn't Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta (Setting Wheel of Dhamma in motion, His first successful discourse) be better placed somewhere close to the beginning of Sammyutta Nikaya instead of being in the last samyutta section - 56th?

In Majjhima Nikaya:
Wouldn't suttas dealing with Buddha's struggle and Awakening (MN26, MN36 and lesser detailed MN4,12) be more appropriately placed in the beginning rather than much later?

What is even more potentially frustrating is that the story of Buddha's Awakening (and his prior practice) seem to be scattered all over the canon,
at least 4 places in MN, a number of places in SN and AN. Wouldn't it have been better if there was ONE long sutta dealing with Buddha's awakening (the sutta could be copied to other Nikayas, just in case to avoid textual loss)

Similar for some other important great Bhikkhus and topics. It would have been so much better if all suttas, for example dealing with Ven. Rahula, be in one or few longer suttas. If there have to be multiple suttas, why not place them in a group? Why in MN suttas dealing with him are: 61,62 and ... 147. Wouldn't it be more organized to have suttas dealing with Ven. Rahula be 61,62,63 ?
Same for other monks and topics.

The problem with incomplete suttas being scattered around the canon is that it is possible to be misled about the message. So it is not an aesthetic concern on my part.


I would really like to know why they are arranged in this way and why many topics seem to be scattered around the canon.

Thank you.

[Pulsar]

Alex123 wrote

Why are the sutta arranged in what seems to me to be unsystematic order?
Wouldn't Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta (Setting Wheel of Dhamma in motion, His first successful discourse) be better placed somewhere close to the beginning of Sammyutta Nikaya instead of being in the last samyutta section - 56th?

You just noticed something "unsystematic order" of the Pali canon, that had puzzled me for a while.
As for DN I never explored that, since I mostly rely on SN. VBB has declared that SN is the closest to Buddha. DN and MN are helpful to beginners, apparently they were written for beginners, who were non-buddhists to begin with? according to his comment.
You wrote

In Majjhima Nikaya:
Wouldn't suttas dealing with Buddha's struggle and Awakening (MN26, MN36 and lesser detailed MN4,12) be more appropriately placed in the beginning rather than much later?

Yes I agree...but then some of these suttas are cut and paste jobs. There is a wonderful simile in MN 36, which Bodhi claims, does not belong there.
But by itself it is a marvelous simile, that is found in Buddhist writings, way before sectarianism came into play.
I imagine you are aware that the Pali canon is a sectarian document, seen through the eyes of Vibajjavadin abhidhamma, at times..
Talking about Buddha's enlightenment, MN 19 should have been placed way before MN 4. MN 19 shows how Buddha struggled with his thoughts before enlightenment. This is a very helpful sutta.
Let me break up my response, to make it easy. I continue with the comment below.
Best

[Pulsar]

OP continued:

What is even more potentially frustrating is that the story of Buddha's Awakening (and his prior practice) seem to be scattered all over the canon,
at least 4 places in MN, a number of places in SN and AN.

Not one person was in charge of the compilation of the Pali canon. Later compilers may not have agreed with earlier ones? and hence shifted the order as they saw fit, and modified the content of the suttas also according to their understanding.
Your query on SN and AN...

• SN was translated to Pali at Anuradhapura in the 5th century using SA compiled by Mulasarvastivadins.

Have you noticed the discrepancy in sutta order between SN and SA?
Mulasravastivadin canon was closed before the Pali canon.

• The order of suttas in a Samyutta as simple as Nidana Samyutta are not the same, in SN and SA.

For one interested in trends it is far better to place the suttas in the original order found in the SA and study them.
This method of sutta study helped me understand the logical trends, the earliest compilers used.

Pali compilers excluded some suttas of SA from SN and placed them in
random places in Anguttara Nikaya.
Why they resorted to this? is not explained anywhere.

AN is a hodge podge of suttas (early and late mixed together), but the suttas that stand out brilliantly are the ones that were found in original Samyukta agama, which is a
Mulasarvastivada product.

With love

[Ceisiwr]

Your query on SN and AN...
SN was translated to Pali at Anuradhapura in the 5th century using SA compiled by Mulasarvastivadins.

That isn’t true. The Theravadins didn’t use the Mulasarvastivadins sutras. They had their own.

[Pulsar]

Ceisiwr wrote

That isn’t true. The Theravadins didn’t use the Mulasarvastivadins sutras. They had their own.

Where did you read it? or did you just make it up?
Can we see the original document where what you say is reported? as for what I have reported I will bring the original document written by an esteemed scholar.
Do you mean to say that Samyutta nikaya is not a translation of Samyutta agama? Was Samyutta Nikaya written in Pali originally without the help of Chinese versions?
It is amazing how people like you make up stories as they go along. I can see how traditions were built in this manner.
Earlier you posted :Body part meditation was a Buddha original (you used the words early Buddhism), implying that Buddha practiced such, to gain enlightenment.
Nowhere in Buddha's biographical suttas is it admitted that Buddha meditated on body parts. This was something practiced by those that knew no better, those who had no clue about how suffering originates, the non-buddhists of Buddha's day. In that post you admitted that meditating on body parts removes hindrances.
Removal of identification, is the only thing that removes hindrances.

• Now you claim that SN has nothing to do with SA.

Good luck in your search for ending for suffering!

[Alex123]

Not one person was in charge of the compilation of the Pali canon.

Wasn't Venerable Ananda responcible for all the suttas?
If there were additional suttas added by others, during the next centuries, wouldn't the additions most likely come at the end of the Nikaya? Because inserting a sutta in the middle of Nikaya would mean that ALL reciters would have to really readjust and not skip over the new sutta. It would be easier to remember new sutta in the end. IMHO.

Later compilers may not have agreed with earlier ones? and hence shifted the order as they saw fit, and modified the content of the suttas also according to their understanding.

Why shift the order? It seems to me that it is very reasonable to tell the story of Buddha's Awakening as the FIRST sutta. It seems very reasonable human tendency. Same with systematization of material.

Your query on SN and AN...

• SN was translated to Pali at Anuradhapura in the 5th century using SA compiled by Mulasarvastivadins.

Have you noticed the discrepancy in sutta order between SN and SA?
Mulasravastivadin canon was closed before the Pali canon.

What did Theravadins add that was later? Books such as Milindhapanha? The supposed "good" thing is that at least these were added as extra books which one may or may not hold authoritative for oneself. If the suttas (in 4.5 Nikayas) were not really changed, then it is not too bad...

• The order of suttas in a Samyutta as simple as Nidana Samyutta are not the same, in SN and SA.

For one interested in trends it is far better to place the suttas in the original order found in the SA and study them.
This method of sutta study helped me understand the logical trends, the earliest compilers used.

Can you, please, cut and paste (or give a link) to that order?

Is it something like this below?

Part I: The Five Aggregates
The Aggregates (107/178)
Part II: The Six Sense Bases
The Sense Bases (57/285)
Part III: Causation
Causation (12/78)
The Truths (3/150)
The Elements (1/37)
Feeling (2/31)
Part IV: The Path
The Abodes of Mindfulness (7/54)
Right Effort (lost)
Miraculous Powers (lost)
Faculties (0/27)
Powers (2/60)
Factors of Awakening (7/67)
The Factors of the Noble Path (32/114)
Mindfulness of Breathing (3/22)
The Student (0/32)
Unbroken Faith (0/29)
Part V: The Eight Assemblies
Monks (0/22)
Māra (0/20)
Indra (1/22)
Aristocrats (0/21)
Priests (0/38)
Brahmā (0/10)
Nuns (0/10)
Vaṇgīsa (0/16)
Lesser Gods (1/108)
Yakṣa (0/12)
Forests (0/32)
Part VI: The Teachings by Disciples
Śāriputra (0/81)
Maudgalyāyana (0/53)
Aniruddha (0/11)
Mahākātyāyana (0/10)
Ānanda (0/11)
Citrā (0/10)
Part VII: The Teachings by the Tathāgata
Rādha (22/133)
Views (39/93)
Ending (16/10,996)
Heaven (0/48)
Realization (0/70)
Sense Bases, Elements, and Aggregates (0/182)
Unbroken Faith (0/62)
Mahākāśyapa (0/11)
Village Leaders (0/10)
Horses (0/10)
Mahānāman (0/10)
Beginningless (0/20)
Vatsagotra (0/9)
Heretics and Wanderers (0/15)
Defilements (0/18)
Parables (0/19)
Illness (0/20)
Fruits of Deeds (0/35)
https://canon.dharmapearls.net/01_agama/samyukta/

Thanks.

[mikenz66]

In this link: viewtopic.php?f=25&t=345#p88300 I quote Bhikkhu Bodhi's idea of the organisation of the SN, which may be helpful.

It may also be helpful to remember that the Suttas were transmitted orally from memory for some time. In that case, the order is not particularly important, as one can randomly access the suttas one has memorised.


Mike

[Pulsar]

Thanks for this from your locked thread, Mike.

I intend to use the ordering suggested by Bhikkhu Bodhi:
Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote:
I suggest you might take [the Samyutta Nikaya] in
what seems to me to be the original order, the most reasonable order,
preserved better in the Sarvastivada school (in Chinese
translation).
In the Pali tradition, it seems, the books of the
Samyutta were re-arranged and as a result one loses sight of the
underlying groundplan.

VBB confirms what I stated ...

• Pali tradition, it seems, the books of the
  Samyutta were re-arranged and as a result one loses sight of the
  underlying groundplan.

VBB claims the original order was preserved better in the Sarvastivada. To be specific the SA suttas were preserved by Mulasarvastivada, and that canon was closed way before the Pali canon.
Best
PS Mike wrote

It may also be helpful to remember that the Suttas were transmitted orally from memory for some time. In that case, the order is not particularly important, as one can randomly access the suttas one has memorised.

Hmm... the order is very important in some places of the Samyutta agama to make the trend clear. Consider the series of suttas where Putramansa is found. Perhaps it is not all that crucial when it comes to MN and DN?
Memory was relied upon before the canon was written down in Sri Lanka. All the suttas in SN were translated from SA in Sri Lanka. I don't think memory played a role here.

[Pulsar]

OP wrote regarding SN and SA.. suttas

Can you, please, cut and paste (or give a link) to that order?

I will point out a few places that I have made notes on, when I have the time. I have mostly done it as part of my sutta study. The trends emerging when I follow SA helped immensely.
I used info on Sutta central for this task. On my copy of Samyutta Nikaya I noted the corresponding agama suttas numbers for my own benefit.
Then on a separate notebook I noted the agama sequence... and copied samyutta nikaya numbers against that.
I will bring you a couple of pages of my notebook as I said..or short sections of it, as I find time.
With love

[Pulsar]

OP wrote

"Is it something like this below?"

before I get to bring you excepts from my own research into the SN organization, the things that stood out for me, let us look at CDPatton's chart of comparisons?
He has done a lot of work in this area, of course his work is not limited to SN/SA translations.
He also mentions how Theravadin translators (like Analayo's) interpret Dhamma differently. It tends to change the original meaning, to suit Theravada understanding.
Patton published a chart on Sutta Central.
Perhaps his chart will give you an overall picture to begin with...I will give you differences in more subtle details later as I find the time.
Table of comparisons
CSA VargaCSA SaṃyuktaPrimary Pali ParallelI. The Five Aggregates1. AggregatesSN 22II.
The Six Sense Fields2. Sense FieldsSN 35III.
Various Causes3. CausationSN 124. TruthsSN 565. ElementsSN 146. FeelingsSN 36IV. The Path7.
Abodes of MindfulnessSN 478.
Right Effort (lost)SN 499. Miraculous Abilities (lost)SN 5110. FacultiesSN 4811. PowersAN12. Factors of AwakeningSN 4613. Factors of the Noble PathSN 45, AN14. Mindfulness of BreathingSN 5415. TraineesAN 316. Unbroken PuritySN 55V. The Eight Assemblies17. Monks(First part) SN 2118. MāraSN 419. IndraSN 1120. NobilitySN 321. PriestsSN 722. BrahmāSN 623. NunsSN 524. VāgīśaSN 825. GodsSN 1-226. YakṣasSN 1027. ForestsSN 9VI. Teachings by Disciples28. ŚāriputraSN 38-3929. MaudgalyāyanaSN 19, 4030. AniruddhaSN 5231. Mahākātyāyana32. ĀnandaAN33. CitraSN 41VII. Teachings by the Tathāgata34. RadhaSN 2335. ViewsSN 2436. Elimination37. Heavens38. RealizationAN, SN 13, SN 4339. Senses, Elements, and AggregatesSN (18), 25, 26, 2740. Unbroken Purity (2)SN 5541. MahākāśyapaSN 1642. Village Leaders**SN 42 43. HorsesAN44. Mahānāma**SN 55, AN45. Without BeginningSN 1546. Vatsagotra the WandererSN 44, MN47. Heretical Wanderers48. Sundry Defilements49. AnalogiesSN 2050. Illness51. Results of ActionsAN 10*
Village Leaders refer to Discourses to Headman Gamanisamyutta 
**SN 44 Abyakakatasamyutta. The undeclared.
Oops in copying and pasting the chart, it lost the Tabulated format of Patton, leading to a mass of confusion.
Let me see whether I can get a link to the tabulated format. Or are you able to access SC directly and look for the chart of comparison of SN with SA. This mess could be due to that SC publishes in Chrome friendly, and I use Safari??
Here is a link to CDPatton's work on SC.
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/dh ... /14023/138
Best

[Pulsar]

Dear Alex 123: I am not sure whether you accessed CDPattons table comparing SA and SN.
I imagine you did.
I will give you an example of my own reasearch. Let us consider Son's Flesh, or Putramansa sutta, SN 12.63. Here is a comparison of how Son's Flesh with its immediate neigbours are listed.
First column gives us the sequence in SA

• SA 371 corresponds to SN 12.11
  SA 372 Corresponds to SN 12.12
  SA 373 corresponds to SN 12.63
  SA 474-SA 378 corresponds to SN12 .64

Can you figure out a reasonable explanation for what the Pali compilers did? By rearranging the sequence randomly they completely lost the design of the original ground work.

SN 12.11 Aharasutta and SN 12.12 Moliyaphagguna if placed
immediately above SN 12.63, as the Agama compilers did, it clarifies the teaching of SN 12.63.
Because of what Pali compilers did, the tradition interpreted the first metaphor of Son's Flesh as folks feeding on solid food. What a Snafu created?
If the order in the Pali canon was
SN 12. 11
SN 12. 12
SN 12. 63
SN 12. 64
The teaching of the Buddha emerges clearly.
Right before reading SA 373 (Son's Flesh,) if the unsuspecting public were to
read Moliyaphagguna SA 372, they would understand what Buddha was intending

• "consciousness feeds on consciousness"

not on solid food, as tradition presents.
But the ill arranged new sequence hides the trend of this critical teaching
Not everyone has the time to read and translate Chinese paralles.
Just one example of how the Pali compilers did not stay faithful to the original ground work of Samyukta agama.
With love

[SarathW]

The greatest thing about Sutta seems to be the result of they are presented in different vantage points (Pariyaya)
I see all the individual Suttas contain the Buddha's teachings are presented in a gradual order.
I think Starting DN1 with the wrong views and MN 1 start with not objectifying even Buddha's teaching is very important.
When things are not in order it helps us to master the teaching by thinking about the differences and not allowing us to objectify Nibbana.
Some people can recite the Tipitaka by memory. There should be some sort of order to do so.

I think it is just a matter of getting used to it.

[Pulsar]

SarathW wrote

I think it is just a matter of getting used to it.

Are you referring to my comment or something else? Are you saying Putramansa sutta (SN 12.63)is
better positioned in the Samyutta Nikaya? Can you justify what you are saying, in relation to Buddha's teaching on four nutrients?
With love

[Pulsar]

SarathW wrote

When things are not in order it helps us to master the teaching by thinking about the differences and not allowing us to objectify Nibbana.

Who would objectify Nibbana? Who can objectify Nibbana where
no objects are found.
You seem to look up to disorderliness, not even Pali compilers of SN on the whole, subscribed to that notion.
Suttas on Dependent Origination are all generally placed in Nidana Samyutta. There is a clear subdivision of Samyuttas, such as the suttas on Aggregates are placed in Khanda Samyutta. Those on Sense Bases are found in Salayatana Samyutta. Ones on feelings in VedanaSamyutta.
That orderliness clearly helps the sutta reader.
Suttas on Satipatthana are placed in Satipatthana Samyutta.
In the current discussion we were questioning why the Pali compilers did not stick to the
same orderliness as the Agama suttas.
VBB thought the Agama suttas laid a better ground plan, for the earnest student.
With love

[Alex123]

Hello Pulsar,

Thank you for your post.

Placing those suttas consecutively like you have placed would make more logical sense and better elucidate the teaching of 4 nutriments.

I've re-read those suttas. It still, to me, looks like "food" is some sort of nutriment gross/or subtle. I think that consciousness feeding on consciousness refers to 4th nutriment (maybe indirectly with 2nd and 3rd).

What does strike me is again the suggestion of intermediate existence and that consciousness in Dependent Origination CAN refer to Re-linking consciousness (paṭisandhi-viññāṇa) that some modern commentators of D.O. are trying to refute.