Articles by alphabetic order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
 Ā Ī Ñ Ś Ū Ö Ō
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0


Difference between revisions of "The Canon"

From Tibetan Buddhist Encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "The Tripitaka (Sanskrit) (Pali: Tipitaka) is the Canon of the Buddhists, both Theravada and Mahayana. Thus it is possible to speak of several Canon...")
 
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
The [[Tripitaka]] ([[Sanskrit]]) ([[Pali]]: [[Tipitaka]]) is the Canon of the [[Buddhists]], both [[Theravada]] and [[Mahayana]]. Thus it is possible to speak of several Canons such as the [[Sthaviravada]], [[Sarvastivada]] and [[Mahayana]] as well as in term of languages like [[Pali]], {{Wiki|Chinese}} and [[Tibetan]]. The word is used basically to refer to the literature, the authorship of which is directly or indirectly ascribed to the [[Buddha]] himself.
+
The [[Tripitaka]] ([[Sanskrit]]) ([[Pali]]: [[Tipitaka]]) is the [[Canon]] of the [[Buddhists]], both [[Theravada]] and [[Mahayana]]. Thus it is possible to speak of several Canons such as the [[Sthaviravada]], [[Sarvastivada]] and [[Mahayana]] as well as in term of [[languages]] like [[Pali]], {{Wiki|Chinese}} and [[Tibetan]]. The [[word]] is used basically to refer to the {{Wiki|literature}}, the authorship of which is directly or indirectly ascribed to the [[Buddha]] himself.
 
[[File:Bon-canon250185.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:Bon-canon250185.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
It is generally believed that whatever was the teaching of the [[Buddha]], conceived under [[Dhamma]] and [[Vinaya]], it was rehearsed soon after his [[death]] by a fairly representative [[body]] of [[disciples]]. The later systematised threefold division, into [[Sutta]], [[Vinaya]] and [[Abhidhamma]] is based on this collection. Sharing a common [[body]] of [[Dhamma]] and [[Vinaya]], the early [[Buddhist]] [[disciples]] appear to have remained united for about a century.
+
It is generally believed that whatever was the [[teaching]] of the [[Buddha]], [[conceived]] under [[Dhamma]] and [[Vinaya]], it was rehearsed soon after his [[death]] by a fairly representative [[body]] of [[disciples]]. The later systematised threefold [[division]], into [[Sutta]], [[Vinaya]] and [[Abhidhamma]] is based on this collection. Sharing a common [[body]] of [[Dhamma]] and [[Vinaya]], the early [[Buddhist]] [[disciples]] appear to have remained united for about a century.
  
The [[Council]] of [[Vesali]] or the [[second Buddhist Council]] saw the break up of this original [[body]] and as many as eighteen separate schools were known to [[exist]] by about the first century B.C. It is reasonable to assume that each of these schools would have opted to possess a [[Tripitaka]] of their own or rather their own recension of the [[Tripitaka]], perhaps with a considerably large common core.
+
The [[Council]] of [[Vesali]] or the [[second Buddhist Council]] saw the break up of this original [[body]] and as many as eighteen separate schools were known to [[exist]] by about the first century B.C. It is reasonable to assume that each of these schools would have opted to possess a [[Tripitaka]] of their [[own]] or rather their [[own]] recension of the [[Tripitaka]], perhaps with a considerably large common core.
  
It has long been claimed that the [[Buddha]], as he went about teaching in the Gangetic valley in [[India]] during the 6th and 5th centuries B.C.E., used Magadhi or the [[language]] of [[Magadha]] as his medium of {{Wiki|communication}}. Attempts have been made to identify this Magadhan dialect with [[Pali]], the [[language]] in which the texts of the [[Sthaviravada]] school are recorded. Hence we speak of a [[Pali Canon]], i.e., the literature of the [[Sthaviravadins]] which is believed to be the original word of the [[Buddha]].
+
It has long been claimed that the [[Buddha]], as he went about [[teaching]] in the [[Wikipedia:Ganges|Gangetic valley]] in [[India]] during the 6th and 5th centuries B.C.E., used [[Magadhi]] or the [[language]] of [[Magadha]] as his {{Wiki|medium}} of {{Wiki|communication}}. Attempts have been made to identify this [[Magadhan]] {{Wiki|dialect}} with [[Pali]], the [[language]] in which the texts of the [[Sthaviravada]] school are recorded. Hence we speak of a [[Pali Canon]], i.e., the {{Wiki|literature}} of the [[Sthaviravadins]] which is believed to be the original [[word]] of the [[Buddha]].
At any rate, this is the only complete recension we possess and the [[Pali]] texts seem to preserve an older [[tradition]] much more than most of the extant [[Buddhist]] works in other languages.  
+
 
Further, the [[Sthaviravadins]] admit two other major divisions of [[Pali]] [[Buddhist]] literature which are non-{{Wiki|Canonical}}. They are:
+
 
 +
At any rate, this is the only complete recension we possess and the [[Pali]] texts seem to preserve an older [[tradition]] much more than most of the extant [[Buddhist]] works in other [[languages]].  
 +
Further, the [[Sthaviravadins]] admit two other major divisions of [[Pali]] [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|literature}} which are non-{{Wiki|Canonical}}. They are:
 
:1. Post-{{Wiki|Canonical}} [[Pali literature]] including works like [[Petakopadesa]] and [[Milindapanha]], the authorship of which is ascribed to one or more [[disciples]].
 
:1. Post-{{Wiki|Canonical}} [[Pali literature]] including works like [[Petakopadesa]] and [[Milindapanha]], the authorship of which is ascribed to one or more [[disciples]].
:2. [[Pali]] Commentarial literature which includes:
+
:2. [[Pali]] {{Wiki|Commentarial}} {{Wiki|literature}} which includes:
::(a) [[Atthakatha]] or Commentaries, the original version of which is believed to have been taken over to [[Sri Lanka]] by [[Thera Mahinda]], the missionary sent by [[Asoka]] and
+
 
 +
 
 +
::(a) [[Atthakatha]] or Commentaries, the original version of which is believed to have been taken over to [[Sri Lanka]] by [[Thera Mahinda]], the {{Wiki|missionary}} sent by [[Asoka]] and
 
::(b) the different strata of Tika or Sub-Commentaries, contributions to which were made by [[Buddhist]] [[monks]] of [[Sri Lanka]], [[India]] and [[Burma]].
 
::(b) the different strata of Tika or Sub-Commentaries, contributions to which were made by [[Buddhist]] [[monks]] of [[Sri Lanka]], [[India]] and [[Burma]].
  
Besides this [[Pali]] recension of the [[Sthaviravada]] school there are fragmentary texts of the [[Sarvastivada]] or of the [[Mulasarvastivada]] which are preserved in [[Sanskrit]]. A large portion of their [[Vinaya]] texts in [[Sanskrit]] is preserved in the Gilgit manuscripts. But a more complete collection of the [[Sarvastivada]] recension (perhaps also of the [[Dharmapuptaka]] and [[Kasyapiya]]), i.e., a [[Sanskrit]] Canon, must have possibly existed as is evident from the {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations preserved to us. These include complete translations of the four [[agamas]] (the equivalent of the [[Pali]] [[nikayas]]). Of the [[Ksudraka]] ([[Pali]]: [[Khuddaka]]), only some texts are preserved in {{Wiki|Chinese}}. In addition to these, the {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations seem to preserve, to the credit of the [[Sarvastivadins]], a vast [[Vinaya]] literature and an independent collection of seven [[Abhidhamma]] treatises. Thus what could be referred to as a [[Sarvastivada]] Canon ranges between fragments of texts preserved in [[Sanskrit]] and the more representative collection of the [[Tripitaka]] preserved in {{Wiki|Chinese}}. It may be mentioned here that a version of the [[Mulasarvastivada Vinaya]] consisting of seven parts, even more faithful than the {{Wiki|Chinese}} version, is preserved in [[Tibetan]]. Of the [[Abhidharma]] collection only the [[Prajnaptisastra]] appears to have been translated into [[Tibetan]].
+
Besides this [[Pali]] recension of the [[Sthaviravada]] school there are fragmentary texts of the [[Sarvastivada]] or of the [[Mulasarvastivada]] which are preserved in [[Sanskrit]]. A large portion of their [[Vinaya]] texts in [[Sanskrit]] is preserved in the {{Wiki|Gilgit manuscripts}}. But a more complete collection of the [[Sarvastivada]] recension (perhaps also of the [[Dharmapuptaka]] and [[Kasyapiya]]), i.e., a [[Sanskrit]] [[Canon]], must have possibly existed as is evident from the {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations preserved to us. These include complete translations of the four [[agamas]] (the {{Wiki|equivalent}} of the [[Pali]] [[nikayas]]). Of the [[Ksudraka]] ([[Pali]]: [[Khuddaka]]), only some texts are preserved in {{Wiki|Chinese}}.  
 +
 
 +
In addition to these, the {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations seem to preserve, to the credit of the [[Sarvastivadins]], a vast [[Vinaya]] {{Wiki|literature}} and an {{Wiki|independent}} collection of seven [[Abhidhamma]] treatises. Thus what could be referred to as a [[Sarvastivada]] [[Canon]] ranges between fragments of texts preserved in [[Sanskrit]] and the more representative collection of the [[Tripitaka]] preserved in {{Wiki|Chinese}}. It may be mentioned here that a version of the [[Mulasarvastivada Vinaya]] consisting of seven parts, even more faithful than the {{Wiki|Chinese}} version, is preserved in [[Tibetan]]. Of the [[Abhidharma]] collection only the [[Prajnaptisastra]] appears to have been translated into [[Tibetan]].
 
[[File:002-3.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:002-3.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
Speaking further of the [[Tripitaka]] in terms of [[language]] we have in {{Wiki|Chinese}} different recensions of the Canon (preserved in part) belonging to different schools. These recensions are primarily based on the [[Tripitaka]] of [[Indian]] origin. In addition to the ancient texts which these recensions preserve they also contain independent expositions of the early [[doctrines]] or commentarial literature on them. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} Canon preserves the [[Vinaya]] texts of as many as seven different schools. In place of the division into ‘{{Wiki|canonical}} groups’ of [[Sutra]], [[Abhidharma]] and [[Vinaya]], this new arrangement seems to reckon with a [[live]] and continuous [[tradition]] in accepting as authoritative both the [[Sutra]] (or words of [[Buddha]]) and [[Sastra]] (or commentaries, treatises, etc. of [[disciples]] of a later date).
 
  
It becomes clear from the foregoing analysis that in speaking of a [[Buddhist Canon]] one has to admit that it is both vast in extent and complex in character. While the earlier and more orthodox schools of [[Buddhism]] reserved the term {{Wiki|Canonical}} to refer to the [[Body]] of literature, the greater part of which could be reasonably ascribed to the [[Buddha]] himself, other [[traditions]] which developed further away from the centre of [[activity]] of the [[Buddha]] and at a relatively later date choose to lay under the term Canon the entire mosaic of [[Buddhist]] literature in their possession, which is of varied authorship and is at times extremely heterogeneous in character.  
+
{{Wiki|Speaking}} further of the [[Tripitaka]] in terms of [[language]] we have in {{Wiki|Chinese}} different recensions of the [[Canon]] (preserved in part) belonging to different schools. These recensions are primarily based on the [[Tripitaka]] of [[Indian]] origin. In addition to the [[ancient]] texts which these recensions preserve they also contain {{Wiki|independent}} [[expositions]] of the early [[doctrines]] or {{Wiki|commentarial}} {{Wiki|literature}} on them.
 +
 
 +
The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Canon]] preserves the [[Vinaya]] texts of as many as seven different schools. In place of the [[division]] into ‘{{Wiki|canonical}} groups’ of [[Sutra]], [[Abhidharma]] and [[Vinaya]], this new arrangement seems to reckon with a [[live]] and continuous [[tradition]] in accepting as authoritative both the [[Sutra]] (or words of [[Buddha]]) and [[Sastra]] (or commentaries, treatises, etc. of [[disciples]] of a later date).
 +
 
 +
It becomes clear from the foregoing analysis that in {{Wiki|speaking}} of a [[Buddhist Canon]] one has to admit that it is both vast in extent and complex in [[character]]. While the earlier and more [[orthodox]] schools of [[Buddhism]] reserved the term {{Wiki|Canonical}} to refer to the [[Body]] of {{Wiki|literature}}, the greater part of which could be reasonably ascribed to the [[Buddha]] himself, other [[traditions]] which developed further away from the centre of [[activity]] of the [[Buddha]] and at a relatively later date choose to lay under the term [[Canon]] the entire mosaic of [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|literature}} in their possession, which is of varied authorship and is at times extremely {{Wiki|heterogeneous}} in [[character]].  
 +
 
 +
 
  
 
===The [[First Rehearsal of the Tipitaka]]===
 
===The [[First Rehearsal of the Tipitaka]]===
  
After the Final Extinction ([[Parinirvana]]) of the [[Buddha]], and the [[cremation]] of his [[body]], the community of [[monks]] chose five hundred [[Arahants]] ('[[worthy]] ones', 'perfected ones') to work together to compile the [[doctrine]] and the [[discipline]], in order to prevent the true [[doctrine]] from being submerged in false [[doctrines]]. Each of the recensions of the [[Vinaya]] now available contains an appendix which narrates how one of the senior [[monks]], [[Mahakasyapa]], presided over this assembly, which worked systematically through everything the [[Buddha]] was remembered to have said and produced an agreed canon of texts embodying it. The versions differ over the details but agree in broad outline. The [[Arahants]] met in [[Rajagrha]], since that great city could most easily support such a large assembly for several months. The organisation of the [[Buddhists]] tended to centre on great cities as it was apparently not possible in any other way to convene a meeting large enough to be authoritative for the entire community, given its democratic constitution.
+
 
 +
 
 +
After the Final [[Extinction]] ([[Parinirvana]]) of the [[Buddha]], and the [[cremation]] of his [[body]], the {{Wiki|community}} of [[monks]] chose five hundred [[Arahants]] ('[[worthy]] ones', 'perfected ones') to work together to compile the [[doctrine]] and the [[discipline]], in order to prevent the true [[doctrine]] from being submerged in false [[doctrines]]. Each of the recensions of the [[Vinaya]] now available contains an appendix which narrates how one of the senior [[monks]], [[Mahakasyapa]], presided over this assembly, which worked systematically through everything the [[Buddha]] was remembered to have said and produced an agreed [[canon]] of texts [[embodying]] it.  
 +
 
 +
The versions differ over the details but agree in broad outline. The [[Arahants]] met in [[Rajagrha]], since that great city could most easily support such a large assembly for several months. The organisation of the [[Buddhists]] tended to centre on great cities as it was apparently not possible in any other way to convene a meeting large enough to be authoritative for the entire {{Wiki|community}}, given its democratic constitution.
 
[[File:Kernbibliotheek1978.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:Kernbibliotheek1978.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
[[Ananda]], who being the Buddha’s personal attendant, had heard the discourses more than anyone else, first recited the ‘doctrine’ ([[dharma]]). [[Mahakasyapa]] asked him about all the dialogues, etc., he remembered and the assembly endorsed his versions as correct. The [[doctrine]] compiled in this way became known as the [[Sutra Pitaka]], the collection of [[sutras]] (the term [[pitaka]] probably signifies a '[[tradition]]' of a group of texts). The [[discipline]] was similarly recited by [[Upali]], a specialist in that [[subject]], and codified as the [[Vinaya Pitaka]]. On the third [[pitaka]] ([[Abhidhamma]]) which should make up the [[Tipitaka]] ('[[Three Pitakas]]') there is disagreement. The [[Sthaviravada]] and [[Mahasamghika]] versions do not mention its recitation, and since the agreement of these two schools should establish the oldest available textual [[tradition]] it appears that originally there were only two Pitakas. However, even the [[Mahasamghika]] account mentions the [[Abhidhamma]] as among the texts handed down after the rehearsal. The [[Mahisasaka]] version makes no mention of a third [[Pitaka]].The [[Sarvastivada]] and [[Dharmaguptaka Vinayas]] on the other hand have [[Ananda]] reciting the [[Abhidhamma]] as well as the [[Sutra]]. The [[Kasyapiya]] (=Haimavata) mentions the [[Abhidhamma Pitaka]] without saying who recited it. A later text of the [[Sarvastivada]] School, the [[Asokavadana]] states that [[Kasyapa]] recited the [[Matrka]] or [[Matrka Pitaka]] (two versions of the text). The same [[tradition]] is found in the [[Vinaya]] of the [[Mula Sarvastivada]] School, a late offshoot of the [[Sarvastivada]] which thoroughly revised and enlarged its [[Tipitaka]]. 'Whether a [[Matrka]] or [[Abhidhamma]] was actually recited at the First Rehearsal or not, all the [[early schools]] were equipped with a third, [[Abhidhamma Pitaka]].
+
 
 +
[[Ananda]], who being the [[Buddha’s]] personal attendant, had heard the [[discourses]] more than anyone else, first recited the ‘[[doctrine]]’ ([[dharma]]). [[Mahakasyapa]] asked him about all the dialogues, etc., he remembered and the assembly endorsed his versions as correct. The [[doctrine]] compiled in this way became known as the [[Sutra Pitaka]], the collection of [[sutras]] (the term [[pitaka]] probably {{Wiki|signifies}} a '[[tradition]]' of a group of texts). The [[discipline]] was similarly recited by [[Upali]], a specialist in that [[subject]], and codified as the [[Vinaya Pitaka]]. On the third [[pitaka]] ([[Abhidhamma]]) which should make up the [[Tipitaka]] ('[[Three Pitakas]]') there is disagreement.  
 +
 
 +
The [[Sthaviravada]] and [[Mahasamghika]] versions do not mention its {{Wiki|recitation}}, and since the agreement of these two schools should establish the oldest available textual [[tradition]] it appears that originally there were only two [[Pitakas]]. However, even the [[Mahasamghika]] account mentions the [[Abhidhamma]] as among the texts handed down after the rehearsal. The [[Mahisasaka]] version makes no mention of a third [[Pitaka]].The [[Sarvastivada]] and [[Dharmaguptaka Vinayas]] on the other hand have [[Ananda]] reciting the [[Abhidhamma]] as well as the [[Sutra]]. The [[Kasyapiya]] (=[[Haimavata]]) mentions the [[Abhidhamma Pitaka]] without saying who recited it.  
 +
 
 +
A later text of the [[Sarvastivada]] School, the [[Asokavadana]] states that [[Kasyapa]] recited the [[Matrka]] or [[Matrka Pitaka]] (two versions of the text). The same [[tradition]] is found in the [[Vinaya]] of the [[Mula Sarvastivada]] School, a late offshoot of the [[Sarvastivada]] which thoroughly revised and enlarged its [[Tipitaka]]. 'Whether a [[Matrka]] or [[Abhidhamma]] was actually recited at the First Rehearsal or not, all the [[early schools]] were equipped with a third, [[Abhidhamma Pitaka]].
 
[[File:147ages.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:147ages.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
According to the consensus of the schools the [[Sutra Pitaka]] was arranged in five [[agamas]], '[[traditions]]' (the usual term, but the [[Sthaviravadins]] more often call them [[nikayas]], 'collections'). The order also is generally agreed to be as follows: (1) [[Digha Nikaya]]. ('Long [[Tradition]]', about 30 of the longest [[sutras]]); (2) [[Majjhima Nikaya]] ('Intermediate [[Tradition]]', about 150 [[sutras]] of intermediate length; the short [[sutras]], the number of which ran into thousands, and were classified in two Ways as) (3) [[Samyutta Nikaya]] ('Connected [[Tradition]]', [[sutras]] classified by topic, for example the [[sutras]] on conditioned origination); (4) [[Anguttara Nikaya]] ('One Up [[Tradition]]', [[sutras]] on enumerated items classified according to the numbers of the items in sections of ones, twos, threes . . . up to elevens) ; (5) [[Khuddaka Nikaya]] (outside the first four [[Nikayas]], there remained a number of texts regarded by all the schools as of inferior importance, either because they were compositions of followers of the [[Buddha]] and not the words of the [[Master]] himself, or because they were of doubtful authenticity, these were collected in this 'Minor [[Tradition]]').
 
  
This order of the five '[[traditions]]' happens also to be the order of their authenticity, probably because it was easier to insert short texts among a large number or to get a composition of doubtful origin admitted to the already doubtful Minor [[Tradition]] of a school. This is soon ascertained by comparing the various available recensions. It has been suggested that some schools did not have a Minor [[Tradition]] at all, though they still had some of the minor texts, incorporated in their [[Vinaya]], hence the '[[Four Nikayas]]' are sometimes spoken of as representing the [[Sutras]].
+
According to the consensus of the schools the [[Sutra Pitaka]] was arranged in five [[agamas]], '[[traditions]]' (the usual term, but the [[Sthaviravadins]] more often call them [[nikayas]], 'collections').
 +
 
 +
 +
The order also is generally agreed to be as follows:
 +
 
 +
(1) [[Digha Nikaya]]. ('[[Long Tradition]]', about 30 of the longest [[sutras]]);
 +
(2) [[Majjhima Nikaya]] ('[[Intermediate Tradition]]', about 150 [[sutras]] of [[intermediate]] length; the short [[sutras]], the number of which ran into thousands, and were classified in two Ways as)
 +
(3) [[Samyutta Nikaya]] ('[[Connected Tradition]]', [[sutras]] classified by topic, for example the [[sutras]] on [[conditioned]] origination);
 +
(4) [[Anguttara Nikaya]] ('[[One Up Tradition]]', [[sutras]] on enumerated items classified according to the numbers of the items in [[sections]] of ones, twos, threes . . . up to [[elevens]]) ;
 +
(5) [[Khuddaka Nikaya]] (outside the first four [[Nikayas]], there remained a number of texts regarded by all the schools as of {{Wiki|inferior}} importance, either because they were compositions of followers of the [[Buddha]] and not the words of the [[Master]] himself, or because they were of [[doubtful]] authenticity, these were collected in this '[[Minor Tradition]]').
 +
 
 +
This order of the five '[[traditions]]' happens also to be the order of their authenticity, probably because it was easier to insert short texts among a large number or to get a composition of [[doubtful]] origin admitted to the already [[doubtful]] [[Minor Tradition]] of a school.  
 +
 
 +
This is soon ascertained by comparing the various available recensions.  
 +
 
 +
It has been suggested that some schools did not have a [[Minor [[Tradition]] at all, though they still had some of the minor texts, incorporated in their [[Vinaya]], hence the '[[Four Nikayas]]' are sometimes spoken of as representing the [[Sutras]].
 +
 
 +
The most noticeable feature of the [[Minor Tradition]] is that its texts are for the most part in verse as opposed to the prevailing prose of the rest of the [[Tipitaka]]. In other words, whatever else may be said about their authenticity, they are {{Wiki|poetic}} compositions which may stimulate [[interest]] in the [[doctrine]] but are as remote as possible from being systematic [[expositions]] of it.
 +
 
 +
We have naturally ignored them in investigating the [[teaching]] of the [[Buddha]], but they are of much [[interest]] in themselves, as {{Wiki|literature}}, and in connection with the popularisation of [[Buddhism]] in the centuries following the [[parinirvana]] when in fact many of them were composed.
 +
 
  
The most noticeable feature of the Minor [[Tradition]] is that its texts are for the most part in verse as opposed to the prevailing prose of the rest of the [[Tipitaka]]. In other words, whatever else may be said about their authenticity, they are poetic compositions which may stimulate interest in the [[doctrine]] but are as remote as possible from being systematic expositions of it. We have naturally ignored them in investigating the teaching of the [[Buddha]], but they are of much interest in themselves, as literature, and in connection with the popularisation of [[Buddhism]] in the centuries following the [[parinirvana]] when in fact many of them were composed.
 
 
[[File:19gmkm.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:19gmkm.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
The First Rehearsal is recorded to have taken place during the rainy season of the first year after the  [[parinirvana]], the latter event being the era from which the [[Buddhists]] have reckoned their chronology. It does not now appear to be possible to determine the exact extent and contents of the [[Tipitaka]] thus collected, in fact as we have seen it may at first have consisted of only two pitakas, not three, namely the [[Doctrine]] and the [[Discipline]]. It is clear that some texts were subsequently added, even before the schisms of the schools, for example the account of the First Rehearsal itself, an account of a second such rehearsal a century later and a number of [[sutras]] which actually state that they narrate something which took place after the [[parinirvana]] or which refer to events known to have taken place later. It is interesting that the account in the [[Vinaya]] records that at least one [[monk]] preferred to disregard the version of the [[Buddha]]'s discourses collected at this rehearsal and remember his own, as he had received it from the [[Buddha]]. This was Purana, who returned from the South after the Rehearsal. The elders invited him to possess himself of the collection rehearsed but he politely declined. If there were a number of [[monks]] in distant parts who missed the First Rehearsal it is likely enough that quite a number of discourses remembered by them and handed down to their pupils existed, which were missed at the Rehearsal though perfectly authentic. Under these conditions it would seem reasonable to incorporate such discourses in the [[Tipitaka]] later, despite the [[risk]] of accepting unauthentic texts.
+
The First Rehearsal is recorded to have taken place during the [[rainy season]] of the first year after the  [[parinirvana]], the [[latter]] event being the {{Wiki|era}} from which the [[Buddhists]] have reckoned their {{Wiki|chronology}}.  
 +
 
 +
It does not now appear to be possible to determine the exact extent and contents of the [[Tipitaka]] thus collected, in fact as we have seen it may at first have consisted of only two [[pitakas]], not three, namely the [[Doctrine]] and the [[Discipline]].  
 +
 
 +
It is clear that some texts were subsequently added, even before the {{Wiki|schisms}} of the schools, for example the account of the First Rehearsal itself, an account of a second such rehearsal a century later and a number of [[sutras]] which actually [[state]] that they narrate something which took place after the [[parinirvana]] or which refer to events known to have taken place later.  
 +
 
 +
It is [[interesting]] that the account in the [[Vinaya]] records that at least one [[monk]] preferred to [[disregard]] the version of the [[Buddha]]'s [[discourses]] collected at this rehearsal and remember his [[own]], as he had received it from the [[Buddha]].  
 +
 
 +
This was {{Wiki|Purana}}, who returned from the [[South]] after the Rehearsal. The [[elders]] invited him to possess himself of the collection rehearsed but he politely declined. If there were a number of [[monks]] in distant parts who missed the First Rehearsal it is likely enough that quite a number of [[discourses]] remembered by them and handed down to their pupils existed, which were missed at the Rehearsal though perfectly [[Wikipedia:Authenticity|authentic]]. Under these [[conditions]] it would seem reasonable to incorporate such [[discourses]] in the [[Tipitaka]] later, despite the [[risk]] of accepting unauthentic texts.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
The [[Mahaparinirvana Sutra]] makes the [[Buddha]] himself lay down a {{Wiki|rule}} to cover just this situation: if someone claims to be in possession of an [[Wikipedia:Authenticity|authentic]] text not in the [[Sutras]] or in the [[Vinaya]] - again two [[pitakas]] only - it should be checked against the [[Sutra]] and [[Vinaya]] and accepted only if it agrees with them.
 +
 
 +
Such agreement or disagreement may have seemed obvious enough at first. Later it was far from obvious and depended on {{Wiki|subtle}} interpretations; thus the schools came to accept many new texts, some of which surely contained new [[doctrines]].
 +
 
 +
 
 +
It appears that during the [[Buddha]]'s [[lifetime]] and for some centuries afterwards [[nothing]] was written down: not because [[writing]] was not in use at the time but because it was not customary to use it for study and [[teaching]]. It was used in commerce and administration, in other words for {{Wiki|ephemeral}} purposes; [[scholars]] and [[philosophers]] disdained it, for to them to study a text presupposed [[knowing]] it by [[heart]].
 +
 
 +
To preserve a large corpus of texts meant simply the proper organisation of the available manpower. 'Few [[monks]] at any period seem to have' known the whole [[Tripitaka]].
 +
 
 +
The original [[division]] of the [[Sutras]] into several [[agamas]], '[[traditions]]', seems primarily to have reflected what [[monks]] could reasonably be expected to learn during their {{Wiki|training}}.
 +
 
 +
Thus in [[Sri Lanka]], at least, in the [[Sthaviravada]] School, it is recorded that the [[monks]] were organised in groups specialising in each of the [[agamas]] or the [[Vinaya]] or the [[Abhidhamma]], handing these texts down to their pupils and so maintaining the [[tradition]].
 +
 
 +
In fact even ten years after his full 'entrance' into the {{Wiki|community}} a [[monk]] was expected to know, besides part of the [[Vinaya]] [[discipline]] obligatory for all, only a part, usually about a third, of his [[agama]], and these basic texts are pointed out in the commentary on the [[Vinaya]].
 +
 
 +
A [[monk]] belonging to the [[Digha]] [[tradition]], for example, should know ten of its long [[sutras]], including the [[Mahaparinivana]], the [[Mahanidana]] and the [[Mahasatipatthana]].  
  
The [[Mahaparinirvana Sutra]] makes the [[Buddha]] himself lay down a rule to cover just this situation: if someone claims to be in possession of an authentic text not in the [[Sutras]] or in the [[Vinaya]] - again two pitakas only - it should be checked against the [[Sutra]] and [[Vinaya]] and accepted only if it agrees with them. Such agreement or disagreement may have seemed obvious enough at first. Later it was far from obvious and depended on subtle interpretations; thus the schools came to accept many new texts, some of which surely contained new [[doctrines]].
+
He was then regarded as competent to teach. Among the [[Sthaviravadins]] there were even slight differences of opinion on certain matters between the several [[traditions]] of the [[sutras]]. Thus the [[Digha]] [[tradition]] did not admit the [[Avadanas]] to have been a text authenticated by recital at the First Rehearsal, whereas the [[Madhyama]] [[tradition]] did: they thus differed as to the extent of the [[Tipitaka]].
It appears that during the [[Buddha]]'s lifetime and for some centuries afterwards [[nothing]] was written down: not because [[writing]] was not in use at the time but because it was not customary to use it for study and teaching. It was used in commerce and administration, in other words for {{Wiki|ephemeral}} purposes; [[scholars]] and [[philosophers]] disdained it, for to them to study a text presupposed [[knowing]] it by [[heart]]. To preserve a large corpus of texts meant simply the proper organisation of the available manpower. 'Few [[monks]] at any period seem to have' known the whole [[Tripitaka]]. The original division of the [[Sutras]] into several [[agamas]], '[[traditions]]', seems primarily to have reflected what [[monks]] could reasonably be expected to learn during their training. Thus in [[Sri Lanka]], at least, in the [[Sthaviravada]] School, it is recorded that the [[monks]] were organised in groups specialising in each of the [[agamas]] or the [[Vinaya]] or the [[Abhidhamma]], handing these texts down to their pupils and so maintaining the [[tradition]]. In fact even ten years after his full 'entrance' into the community a [[monk]] was expected to know, besides part of the [[Vinaya]] [[discipline]] obligatory for all, only a part, usually about a third, of his [[agama]], and these basic texts are pointed out in the commentary on the [[Vinaya]]. A [[monk]] belonging to the Digha [[tradition]], for example, should know ten of its long [[sutras]], including the [[Mahaparinivana]], the [[Mahanidana]] and the [[Mahasatipatthana]]. He was then regarded as competent to teach. Among the [[Sthaviravadins]] there were even slight differences of opinion on certain matters between the several [[traditions]] of the [[sutras]]. Thus the Digha [[tradition]] did not admit the [[Avadanas]] to have been a text authenticated by recital at the First Rehearsal, whereas the [[Madhyama]] [[tradition]] did: they thus differed as to the extent of the [[Tipitaka]].
 
 
[[File:77955.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:77955.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
If there were a standard [[Tipitaka]] as established at the First Rehearsal one might expect its texts to be fixed in their actual wording, and therefore in their [[language]]. This, however ' does not appear to have been the case. The followers of the [[Buddha]] were drawn even during his lifetime from many different countries and spoke, if not completely different languages, at least different dialects. It has been shown that the early [[Buddhists]] observed the principle of adopting the local languages wherever they taught. Probably they owe much of their success in spreading the [[Doctrine]] and establishing it in many countries to this. The [[Buddha]] himself is recorded to have enjoined his followers to remember his teaching in their own languages, not in his [[language]], nor in the archaic but respectable cadences of the {{Wiki|Vedic}} scriptures of the [[Brahmans]]. The recensions of the [[Tipitaka]] preserved in different countries of [[India]] therefore differed in dialect or [[language]] from the earliest times, and we cannot speak of any 'original' [[language]] of the [[Buddhist canon]], nor, as it happens, have we any definite [[information]] as to what [[language]] the [[Buddha]] himself spoke.' At the most, we can say that the recension in the [[language]] of [[Magadha]] may have enjoyed some pre-eminence for the first few centuries, since 'Magadhisms' have been detected even in non-Magahi [[Buddhist texts]]. This may have reflected the political supremacy of [[Magadha]].
 
  
The British Library / University of Washington Early [[Buddhist]] Manuscripts Project was founded in September 1996 in order to promote the study, editing, and publication of a unique collection of fifty-seven fragments of [[Buddhist]] manuscripts on birch bark scrolls, written in the {{Wiki|Kharosthi script}} and the {{Wiki|Gandhari}} (Prakrit) [[language]] that were acquired by the British Library in 1994. The manuscripts date from, most likely, the first century A.D., and as such are the oldest surviving [[Buddhist texts]], which promise to provide unprecedented insights into the early history of [[Buddhism]] in north [[India]] and in central and east Asia.
+
 
 +
If there were a standard [[Tipitaka]] as established at the First Rehearsal one might expect its texts to be fixed in their actual wording, and therefore in their [[language]]. This, however ' does not appear to have been the case.
 +
 
 +
The followers of the [[Buddha]] were drawn even during his [[lifetime]] from many different countries and spoke, if not completely different [[languages]], at least different {{Wiki|dialects}}.
 +
 
 +
It has been shown that the early [[Buddhists]] observed the [[principle]] of adopting the local [[languages]] wherever they [[taught]]. Probably they owe much of their [[success]] in spreading the [[Doctrine]] and establishing it in many countries to this.
 +
 
 +
The [[Buddha]] himself is recorded to have enjoined his followers to remember his [[teaching]] in their [[own]] [[languages]], not in his [[language]], nor in the {{Wiki|archaic}} but respectable cadences of the {{Wiki|Vedic}} [[scriptures]] of the [[Brahmans]].
 +
 
 +
The recensions of the [[Tipitaka]] preserved in different countries of [[India]] therefore differed in {{Wiki|dialect}} or [[language]] from the earliest times, and we cannot speak of any 'original' [[language]] of the [[Buddhist canon]], nor, as it happens, have we any definite [[information]] as to what [[language]] the [[Buddha]] himself spoke.'
 +
 
 +
At the most, we can say that the recension in the [[language]] of [[Magadha]] may have enjoyed some pre-eminence for the first few centuries, since 'Magadhisms' have been detected even in non-Magahi [[Buddhist texts]]. This may have reflected the {{Wiki|political}} supremacy of [[Magadha]].
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
The {{Wiki|British Library}} / {{Wiki|University of Washington}} Early [[Buddhist]] Manuscripts Project was founded in September 1996 in order to promote the study, editing, and publication of a unique collection of fifty-seven fragments of [[Buddhist]] [[manuscripts]] on birch bark scrolls, written in the {{Wiki|Kharosthi script}} and the {{Wiki|Gandhari}} ([[Prakrit]]) [[language]] that were acquired by the {{Wiki|British Library}} in 1994.  
 +
 
 +
The [[manuscripts]] date from, most likely, the first century A.D., and as such are the oldest surviving [[Buddhist texts]], which promise to provide unprecedented [[insights]] into the early history of [[Buddhism]] in [[north]] [[India]] and in central and [[east]] {{Wiki|Asia}}.
 +
 
 +
 
  
 
====Extract from an article by Dalya Alberge====
 
====Extract from an article by Dalya Alberge====
 
[[File:87250-84352.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:87250-84352.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
The British Library has discovered remarkable manuscript fragments which it says may be as significant for [[Buddhist]] [[scholars]] as the {{Wiki|Dead Sea Scrolls}} are for {{Wiki|Christianity}} and {{Wiki|Judaism}}. The manuscripts, birchbark scrolls that look like "badly rolled up cigars" when first shown to the library, are believed to be the earliest surviving [[Buddhist text]]. The exact origin is unknown beyond that they were probably found in {{Wiki|Afghanistan}} in earthen jars.
 
  
"These will allow [[scholars]] to get nearer to what [[Buddha]] said than ever before,"the deputy director of the library's Oriental and [[Indian]] Office Collection, Mr Graham Shaw said. They date from the end of the first century AD or the beginning of the second century AD. Apart from bringing [[scholars]] closer to the original [[language]] of the [[Buddha]], this could corroborate the authenticity of teachings recounted in later text.
+
The {{Wiki|British Library}} has discovered remarkable {{Wiki|manuscript}} fragments which it says may be as significant for [[Buddhist]] [[scholars]] as the {{Wiki|Dead Sea Scrolls}} are for {{Wiki|{{Wiki|Christianity}}}} and {{Wiki|Judaism}}. The [[manuscripts]], birchbark scrolls that look like "badly rolled up cigars" when first shown to the library, are believed to be the earliest surviving [[Buddhist text]]. The exact origin is unknown beyond that they were probably found in {{Wiki|Afghanistan}} in earthen jars.
 +
 
 +
"These will allow [[scholars]] to get nearer to what [[Buddha]] said than ever before,"the deputy director of the library's {{Wiki|Oriental}} and [[Indian]] Office Collection, Mr Graham Shaw said. They date from the end of the first century AD or the beginning of the second century AD. Apart from bringing [[scholars]] closer to the original [[language]] of the [[Buddha]], this could corroborate the authenticity of teachings recounted in later text.
 +
 
 +
The [[manuscripts]] include 60 fragments, ranging from the [[Buddha]]'s [[sermons]] to [[poems]] and treatises on the [[psychology]] of [[perception]]. The library acquired them 18 months ago from a {{Wiki|British}} dealer. "Their value was [[incalculable]]", Mr Shaw said.
 +
 
 +
" How would you put a value on the {{Wiki|Dead Sea Scrolls}}?" It is believed they are part of the long-lost [[canon]] of the [[Sarvastivadin]] [[Sect]] that dominated [[Gandhara]] - {{Wiki|modern}} [[north]] {{Wiki|Pakistan}} and [[east]] {{Wiki|Afghanistan}} - and was instrumental in [[Buddhism]]'s spread into central and [[east]] {{Wiki|Asia}}.
  
The manuscripts include 60 fragments, ranging from the [[Buddha]]'s sermons to poems and treatises on the [[psychology]] of [[perception]]. The library acquired them 18 months ago from a British dealer. "Their value was incalculable", Mr Shaw said. " How would you put a value on the {{Wiki|Dead Sea Scrolls}}?" It is believed they are part of the long-lost canon of the [[Sarvastivadin]] Sect that dominated [[Gandhara]] - modern north {{Wiki|Pakistan}} and east {{Wiki|Afghanistan}} - and was instrumental in [[Buddhism]]'s spread into central and east Asia.
+
[[Gandhara]] was one of the greatest [[ancient]] centres of [[Buddhism]].  
  
[[Gandhara]] was one of the greatest ancient centres of [[Buddhism]]. Mr Shaw explained: "The scrolls tell us something about the way [[Buddhists]] passed on the teachings, which were for a long time passed on orally." After the [[Buddha]]'s [[death]], his [[disciples]] are said to have gathered in assemblies where they recited his sermons and organised them into what came to be the [[Buddhist canon]].
+
Mr Shaw explained: "The scrolls tell us something about the way [[Buddhists]] passed on the teachings, which were for a long time passed on orally." After the [[Buddha]]'s [[death]], his [[disciples]] are said to have [[gathered]] in assemblies where they recited his [[sermons]] and organised them into what came to be the [[Buddhist canon]].
 
[[File:95 200.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:95 200.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
Although [[nothing]] is known of their provenance, their attribution has been confirmed by the {{Wiki|University of Seattle}}'s Professor Richard Salomon, one of the [[world]]'s greatest [[scholars]] of {{Wiki|Kharosthi}} - a script derived from the {{Wiki|Aramaic alphabet}} that was restricted to a small area of [[India]]. They were, he said, "the {{Wiki|Dead Sea Scrolls}} of [[Buddhism]]". Years of study lay ahead before the text can be deciphered, analysed and compared with existing texts.
 
  
The fragments include tales told on Lake Anavatapata's banks at an assembly of the [[Buddha]] and his [[disciples]]. Another is one of the [[Buddha]]'s sermons on the rhinoceros horn ([[Suttanipata]]). "The rhinoceros and its horn in particular is a [[symbol]] of [[non-attachment]] to material things ... it is not a herd [[animal]]. It just wanders alone."  
+
Although [[nothing]] is known of their provenance, their attribution has been confirmed by the {{Wiki|University of Seattle}}'s {{Wiki|Professor}} Richard Salomon, one of the [[world]]'s greatest [[scholars]] of {{Wiki|Kharosthi}} - a [[script]] derived from the {{Wiki|Aramaic alphabet}} that was restricted to a small area of [[India]].
 +
 
 +
They were, he said, "the {{Wiki|Dead Sea Scrolls}} of [[Buddhism]]". Years of study lay ahead before the text can be deciphered, analysed and compared with [[existing]] texts.
 +
 
 +
The fragments include tales told on Lake Anavatapata's banks at an assembly of the [[Buddha]] and his [[disciples]]. Another is one of the [[Buddha]]'s [[sermons]] on the [[rhinoceros]] horn ([[Suttanipata]]).  
 +
 
 +
"The [[rhinoceros]] and its horn in particular is a [[symbol]] of [[non-attachment]] to material things ... it is not a herd [[animal]]. It just wanders alone."  
 +
 
 +
 
  
 
==The [[Pali Canon]]==
 
==The [[Pali Canon]]==
  
The [[Pali Canon]] is the complete [[scripture]] collection of the [[Theravada]] school. As such, it is the only set of scriptures preserved in the [[language]] of its composition. It is called the [[Tipitaka]] or "[[Three Baskets]]" because it includes the [[Vinaya Pitaka]] or "[[Basket]] of [[Discipline]]," the [[Sutta Pitaka]] or "[[Basket]] of Discourses," and the [[Abhidhamma Pitaka]] or "[[Basket of Higher Teachings]]".  
+
 
 +
 
 +
The [[Pali Canon]] is the complete [[scripture]] collection of the [[Theravada]] school. As such, it is the only set of [[scriptures]] preserved in the [[language]] of its composition.  
 +
 
 +
It is called the [[Tipitaka]] or "[[Three Baskets]]" because it includes the [[Vinaya Pitaka]] or "[[Basket]] of [[Discipline]]," the [[Sutta Pitaka]] or "[[Basket]] of [[Discourses]]," and the [[Abhidhamma Pitaka]] or "[[Basket of Higher Teachings]]".  
 
[[File:Tipitaka chart.gif|frameless|centre|750px|]]
 
[[File:Tipitaka chart.gif|frameless|centre|750px|]]
 
   
 
   
 +
 +
 
==The [[Tibetan Canon]] ==
 
==The [[Tibetan Canon]] ==
 +
  
 
The [[Tibetan Canon]] which consists of two parts:  
 
The [[Tibetan Canon]] which consists of two parts:  
(1) the bKángjur ("Translation of the Word of the [[Buddha]]"), pronounced [[Kanjur]], and (2) the bStan-'gyur ("Translations of the Teachings") pronounced [[Tanjur]]. Because this latter collection contains works attributed to {{Wiki|individuals}} other than the [[Buddha]], it is considered only semi-{{Wiki|canonical}}. The first printing of the [[Kanjur]] occurred not in [[Tibet]], but in [[China]] ({{Wiki|Beijing}}), being completed in 1411. The first [[Tibetan]] edition of the canon was at sNar-tang with the [[Kanjur]] appearing in 1731, followed by the [[Tanjur]] in 1742. Other famous editions of the canon were printed at Derge and Co-ne.
+
 
 +
 
 +
(1) the [[bKángjur]] ("[[Translation of the Word of the Buddha]]"), pronounced [[Kanjur]], and  
 +
 
 +
(2) the [[bStan-'gyur]] ("[[Translations of the Teachings]]") pronounced [[Tanjur]].  
 +
 
 +
 
 +
Because this [[latter]] collection contains works attributed to {{Wiki|individuals}} other than the [[Buddha]], it is considered only semi-{{Wiki|canonical}}.  
 +
 
 +
The first [[printing]] of the [[Kanjur]] occurred not in [[Tibet]], but in [[China]] ({{Wiki|Beijing}}), being completed in 1411.  
 +
 
 +
The first [[Tibetan]] edition of the [[canon]] was at [[sNar-tang]] with the [[Kanjur]] appearing in 1731, followed by the [[Tanjur]] in 1742.  
 +
 
 +
Other famous editions of the [[canon]] were printed at [[Derge]] and [[Co-ne]].
 
[[File:5-tibetan book.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:5-tibetan book.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
(a) bKángjur ([[Kanjur]]): Translation of the Word of the [[Buddha]]; 98 Volumes (according to the Narthang edition).  
+
 
 +
 
 +
(a) [[bKángjur]] ([[Kanjur]]): [[Translation of the Word]] of the [[Buddha]]; 98 Volumes (according to the [[Narthang edition]]).  
  
 
#    [[Vinaya]]: 13 Volumes.
 
#    [[Vinaya]]: 13 Volumes.
Line 73: Line 189:
 
#    [[Tantra]]: 22 Volumes. Contains more than 300 texts.
 
#    [[Tantra]]: 22 Volumes. Contains more than 300 texts.
  
The second, the [[Tanjur]] (bStan-'gyur) is a supplement to the former, or in other words, continuation of the [[tradition]] of the [[Kanjur]]. Among its contents are a collection of stories, the commentaries on the [[Tantra]] section of the [[Kanjur]] and the commentaries on the [[sutra]] section. There are also works relating to [[Abhidharma]] and [[Vinaya]] as well as [[Madhyamika]] and [[Vijnanavada]]. Works coming under the [[sutra]] section of the [[Tanjur]] are not necessarily commentaries on the texts contained in the Mdo-section of the [[Kanjur]]. They are believed to be authoritative works, some of which, however, are not even [[Buddhist]] in character. They deal with [[logic]], [[grammar]], lexicography, [[poetry]] and drama, [[medicine]] and {{Wiki|chemistry}}, [[astrology]] and [[divination]], painting and biographies of saints. Their inclusion in this part of the [[Tibetan Canon]] is perhaps justified on the acceptance of the position that they are necessary aids and accompaniments in the practice of the [[religion]].
+
The second, the [[Tanjur]] ([[bStan-'gyur]]) is a supplement to the former, or in other words, continuation of the [[tradition]] of the [[Kanjur]].  
 +
 
 +
Among its contents are a collection of stories, the commentaries on the [[Tantra]] section of the [[Kanjur]] and the commentaries on the [[sutra]] section.  
 +
 
 +
There are also works relating to [[Abhidharma]] and [[Vinaya]] as well as [[Madhyamika]] and [[Vijnanavada]].  
 +
 
 +
Works coming under the [[sutra]] section of the [[Tanjur]] are not necessarily commentaries on the texts contained in the [[Mdo]]-section of the [[Kanjur]].  
 +
 
 +
They are believed to be authoritative works, some of which, however, are not even [[Buddhist]] in [[character]].  
 +
 
 +
They deal with [[logic]], [[grammar]], {{Wiki|lexicography}}, [[poetry]] and {{Wiki|drama}}, [[medicine]] and {{Wiki|chemistry}}, [[astrology]] and [[divination]], painting and {{Wiki|biographies}} of [[saints]].  
 +
 
 +
Their inclusion in this part of the [[Tibetan Canon]] is perhaps justified on the [[acceptance]] of the position that they are necessary aids and {{Wiki|accompaniments}} in the [[practice]] of the [[religion]].
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
(b) [[bStan-'gyur]] ([[Tanjur]]): [[Translations of the Teachings]] 224 Volumes (3626 texts) according to the {{Wiki|Beijing}} edition.
  
(b) bStan-'gyur ([[Tanjur]]): Translations of the Teachings 224 Volumes (3626 texts) according to the {{Wiki|Beijing}} edition.
 
 
[[File:Images-lamrim.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:Images-lamrim.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
:    A. [[Sutras]] ("Hymns of Praise"): 1 Volume; 64 texts.
 
:    A. [[Sutras]] ("Hymns of Praise"): 1 Volume; 64 texts.
Line 90: Line 221:
 
#    Technical Treatises, 43 Volumes.
 
#    Technical Treatises, 43 Volumes.
  
==The {{Wiki|Chinese}} Canon==
 
The {{Wiki|Chinese}} Canon is called the [[Ta-ts'ang-ching]] or "[[Great Scripture Store]]." The first complete printing of the "[[Three Baskets]]" or [[Tripitaka]] was completed in 983 C.E., and known as the Shu-pen or Szechuan edition. It included 1076 texts in 480 cases. A number of other editions of the modern {{Wiki|Chinese}} Canon were made thereafter. The now standard modern edition of this work is known as the [[Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo]], published in {{Wiki|Tokyo}} between 1924 and 1929. It contains 55 volumes containing 2184 texts, along with a supplement of 45 additional volumes. A fine chapter titled "The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]]" can be found on pp. 365-368 of [[Buddhism]] in [[China]] ({{Wiki|Princeton University}} Press), 1964 by Kenneth K.S. Ch'en.
 
  
===The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] in [[World]] [[Buddhism]]===
+
 
 +
===The [[Chinese Canon]]===
 +
 
 +
 
 +
The [[Chinese Canon]] is called the [[Ta-ts'ang-ching]] or "[[Great Scripture Store]]."
 +
 
 +
The first complete [[printing]] of the "[[Three Baskets]]" or [[Tripitaka]] was completed in 983 C.E., and known as the [[Shu-pen]] or [[Szechuan edition]].
 +
 
 +
It included 1076 texts in 480 cases. A number of other editions of the {{Wiki|modern}} {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Canon]] were made thereafter.
 +
 
 +
The now standard {{Wiki|modern}} edition of this work is known as the [[Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo]], published in {{Wiki|Tokyo}} between 1924 and 1929.
 +
 
 +
It contains 55 volumes containing 2184 texts, along with a supplement of 45 additional volumes.
 +
 
 +
A fine [[chapter]] titled "The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]]" can be found on pp. 365-368 of [[Buddhism]] in [[China]] ({{Wiki|Princeton University}} Press), 1964 by Kenneth K.S. Ch'en.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
===The [[Chinese Tripitaka]] in [[World Buddhism]]===
 
[[File:Flower Garland Sutra.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:Flower Garland Sutra.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
The main objective of the [[World Buddhist Fellowship]] is to link the various schools of [[Buddhism]], coming as they do from all over the [[world]]. This communion can be accomplished by harmonious cooperation on the basis of [[spiritual]] sharing. As a global community we can then actualize the inspiring ideals of [[world]] [[enlightenment]] and salvation through the encouragement of our common [[Buddhist]] culture.
 
  
We must first acknowledge that the various schools of [[thought]] in [[Buddhism]] are indeed facets of the [[Triple Gem]] that is [[Buddhism]]. There is no room for superficial and {{Wiki|dogmatic}} claims that one school is true whereas others are not. For instance the [[Mahayana]] schools should not be lightly dismissed as illegitimate, nor should the [[Sravakavana]] school conversely be despised as moribund. Only when the study and practice of [[Buddhism]] is carried out in a friendly and accommodating {{Wiki|atmosphere}}, with mutual [[trust]] and understanding, will coordination and cooperation be possible. With this attitude, the trash and trimmings now enshrouding [[Buddhism]] can be removed to reveal the essential splendour of the [[Triple Gem]]. Thus [[Buddhism]], which is well-adapted to this modern [[world]], can be redeemed and developed for the purpose of the [[enlightenment]] and salvation of the [[world]] in its dire present need.
 
  
[[Buddhism]] stems from one point of origin and is highly adaptable under many circumstances. For different races, time and environments, it seems to develop into entirely different shapes and forms. But a close study of its trends and modes of development, its adaptations to new environments whilst preserving the integral identity of its core, brings one to the realisation that the different forms of [[Buddhism]] are interrelated and that cooperation amongst them is entirely feasible. Generally, each school has its own characteristics and shortcomings. [[Buddhists]] should honestly survey these various schools, exchanging the shortcomings in each for the strengths in others on the basis of equality, and for the sake of pursuing [[truth]]. In so doing, the [[ultimate truth]] as [[experienced]] by the [[Buddha]] may be [[realized]] and his original {{Wiki|intention}}, as embodied in his teaching, may be fully understood.
+
The main [[objective]] of the [[World Buddhist Fellowship]] is to link the various schools of [[Buddhism]], coming as they do from all over the [[world]].
 +
 
 +
This communion can be accomplished by harmonious cooperation on the basis of [[spiritual]] sharing.
 +
 
 +
As a global {{Wiki|community}} we can then actualize the inspiring ideals of [[world]] [[enlightenment]] and {{Wiki|salvation}} through the encouragement of our common [[Buddhist]] {{Wiki|culture}}.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
We must first [[acknowledge]] that the various schools of [[thought]] in [[Buddhism]] are indeed facets of the [[Triple Gem]] that is [[Buddhism]].
 +
 
 +
There is no room for [[superficial]] and {{Wiki|dogmatic}} claims that one school is true whereas others are not.
 +
 
 +
For instance the [[Mahayana]] schools should not be lightly dismissed as illegitimate, nor should the [[Sravakavana]] school conversely be despised as moribund.
 +
 
 +
Only when the study and [[practice]] of [[Buddhism]] is carried out in a friendly and accommodating {{Wiki|atmosphere}}, with mutual [[trust]] and [[understanding]], will coordination and cooperation be possible. With this [[attitude]], the trash and trimmings now enshrouding [[Buddhism]] can be removed to reveal the [[essential]] [[splendour]] of the [[Triple Gem]].
 +
 
 +
Thus [[Buddhism]], which is well-adapted to this {{Wiki|modern}} [[world]], can be redeemed and developed for the {{Wiki|purpose}} of the [[enlightenment]] and {{Wiki|salvation}} of the [[world]] in its dire {{Wiki|present}} need.
 +
 
 +
[[Buddhism]] stems from one point of origin and is highly adaptable under many circumstances.  
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
For different races, time and environments, it seems to develop into entirely different shapes and [[forms]]. But a close study of its trends and modes of [[development]], its adaptations to new environments whilst preserving the integral [[Wikipedia:Identity (social science)|identity]] of its core, brings one to the realisation that the different [[forms]] of [[Buddhism]] are {{Wiki|interrelated}} and that cooperation amongst them is entirely feasible.  
 +
 
 +
Generally, each school has its [[own]] [[characteristics]] and shortcomings. [[Buddhists]] should honestly survey these various schools, exchanging the shortcomings in each for the strengths in others on the basis of equality, and for the sake of pursuing [[truth]].  
 +
 
 +
In so doing, the [[ultimate truth]] as [[experienced]] by the [[Buddha]] may be [[realized]] and his original {{Wiki|intention}}, as [[embodied]] in his [[teaching]], may be fully understood.
 
[[File:1-1280.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:1-1280.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
When we trace the different schools of [[Buddhism]] in the [[world]] today, from their origins in [[India]], we can see that the profile sprouting of sectarian [[Buddhism]] seems to have taken place as follows:
 
  
'''(1)''' The [[sacred]] texts embodying the [[Buddha]]-[[dharma]] developed over time. The [[sutras]] and [[Vinaya Pitaka]] were the earliest to be compiled and circulated. Round about the beginning of the first century A.D., the researchers of the [[Agama Sutra]] and those dedicated to [[Sravaka]] practice had compiled the [[Abhidharma]], emphasising the existential aspect of [[Dependent Origination]]. On the other hand, the [[Mahayana scriptures]] had been compiled by those who stressed the [[virtues]] of the [[Buddha]] and the practice of the [[Bodhisattva]], emphasizing the aspect of [[emptiness]] as central to the attainment of real understanding of [[Dependent Origination]].
 
  
By the third century A.D., [[Nagarjuna]] had composed his famous [[Sastras]] on the [[Madhyamika]] [[doctrine]] interpreting the [[Agama]] and [[Abhidharma]] on the basis of the [[Mahayana sutras]] of the [[Sunyata]] school. At about the same time, [[Mahayana scriptures]] tending towards '[[eternal]]-[[reality]]' {{Wiki|idealism}}, such as the [[Srimaladeve-Simhanada Sutra]] and the [[Mahaparinirvana Sutra]], had begun to be found, followed by [[sutras]] such as the [[Lankavatara Sutra]]. Along with this development, the Asters and [[Yogacaryas]] of the [[Sravastivada]] school accepted the "[[mind-only]]" aspect of the [[Mahayana]] school. They compiled a number of [[Sastras]] of the [[Yogacara]] [[Vijnanavada]] and eventually flourished as a great [[Mahayana]] school in their own right.
+
When we trace the different schools of [[Buddhism]] in the [[world]] today, from their origins in [[India]], we can see that the profile sprouting of {{Wiki|sectarian}} [[Buddhism]] seems to have taken place as follows:
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
'''(1)''' The [[sacred]] texts [[embodying]] the [[Buddha-dharma]] developed over time.
 +
 
 +
The [[sutras]] and [[Vinaya Pitaka]] were the earliest to be compiled and circulated.
 +
 
 +
Round about the beginning of the first century A.D., the researchers of the [[Agama Sutra]] and those dedicated to [[Sravaka]] [[practice]] had compiled the [[Abhidharma]], emphasising the [[existential]] aspect of [[Dependent Origination]].
 +
 
 +
On the other hand, the [[Mahayana scriptures]] had been compiled by those who stressed the [[virtues]] of the [[Buddha]] and the [[practice]] of the [[Bodhisattva]], {{Wiki|emphasizing}} the aspect of [[emptiness]] as central to the [[attainment]] of real [[understanding]] of [[Dependent Origination]].
 +
 
 +
By the third century A.D., [[Nagarjuna]] had composed his famous [[Sastras]] on the [[Madhyamika]] [[doctrine]] interpreting the [[Agama]] and [[Abhidharma]] on the basis of the [[Mahayana sutras]] of the [[Sunyata]] school.  
 +
 
 +
At about the same time, [[Mahayana scriptures]] tending towards '[[eternal]]-[[reality]]' {{Wiki|idealism}}, such as the [[Srimaladeve-Simhanada Sutra]] and the [[Mahaparinirvana Sutra]], had begun to be found, followed by [[sutras]] such as the [[Lankavatara Sutra]].  
 +
 
 +
Along with this [[development]], the Asters and [[Yogacaryas]] of the [[Sravastivada]] school accepted the "[[mind-only]]" aspect of the [[Mahayana]] school.  
 +
 
 +
They compiled a number of [[Sastras]] of the [[Yogacara]] [[Vijnanavada]] and eventually flourished as a great [[Mahayana]] school in their [[own]] right.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
Then, at about the fifth century there was a further [[development]] of [[esoteric]] [[Yoga]] from the school of [[eternal]]-[[reality]] {{Wiki|idealism}}.
 +
 
 +
If one tried to follow the course of [[development]] of [[Buddhism]] as outlined above, one would have no difficulty tracing the [[evolution]] of the vast diversity of [[scriptures]] and [[doctrines]] held [[sacred]] by the many schools.
  
Then, at about the fifth century there was a further development of [[esoteric]] [[Yoga]] from the school of [[eternal]]-[[reality]] {{Wiki|idealism}}. If one tried to follow the course of development of [[Buddhism]] as outlined above, one would have no difficulty tracing the evolution of the vast diversity of scriptures and [[doctrines]] held [[sacred]] by the many schools.
 
 
[[File:000110602.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:000110602.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
'''(2)''' Doctrinally, [[Buddhism]] was just [[Buddhism]] at first and there was no sectarian [[difference]]. It did not divide into the [[Sravakayana]] and [[Bodhisattvayana]] until about the beginning of the Christian era. Then in the scriptures of the [[Bodhisattvayana]] we begin to see the division of [[Hinayana]] and [[Mahayana]].
+
'''(2)''' Doctrinally, [[Buddhism]] was just [[Buddhism]] at first and there was no {{Wiki|sectarian}} [[difference]].  
 +
 
 +
It did not divide into the [[Sravakayana]] and [[Bodhisattvayana]] until about the beginning of the [[Christian]] {{Wiki|era}}.  
 +
 
 +
Then in the [[scriptures]] of the [[Bodhisattvayana]] we begin to see the [[division]] of [[Hinayana]] and [[Mahayana]].
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
In the second and third centuries [[scriptures]] of [[eternal]]-[[reality]] {{Wiki|idealism}} started to appear in the [[Bodhisattvayana]].
 +
 
 +
In such [[Sutras]] were first seen the terms "{{Wiki|noumenon}}, [[Sunya]] and [[Madhya]]"; and "Hina-, [[Maha]]- and [[Eka-yana]]." T
 +
 
 +
These [[scriptures]] of later date laid special {{Wiki|emphasis}} on the [[achievement]] of [[Buddhahood]], and were thus also classified as [[Buddhayana]].
  
In the second and third centuries scriptures of [[eternal]]-[[reality]] {{Wiki|idealism}} started to appear in the [[Bodhisattvayana]]. In such [[Sutras]] were first seen the terms "noumenon, Sunya and Madhya"; and "Hina-, Maha- and Eka-[[yana]]." These scriptures of later date laid special emphasis on the achievement of [[Buddhahood]], and were thus also classified as [[Buddhayana]].
+
At the beginning of the fifth century, another '[[yana]]', the [[Dharaniyana]], sprung into [[existence]] from the [[noumenal]] school of [[Buddhism]].  
  
At the beginning of the fifth century, another '[[yana]]', the [[Dharaniyana]], sprung into [[existence]] from the noumenal school of [[Buddhism]]. This school classified all [[Buddha]] [[Dharma]] into the [[Tripitaka]], the [[Paramita]] [[Pitaka]] (including everything of the [[exoteric]] schools), and the [[Dharani Pitaka]]. It also categorised the [[Dharma]] according to practice as: [[Catvri-satyani]], [[Paramita]], and [[greed]]-ingrained.
+
This school classified all [[Buddha Dharma]] into the [[Tripitaka]], the [[Paramita Pitaka]] (including everything of the [[exoteric]] schools), and the [[Dharani Pitaka]].  
  
These classifications are indicative of the diversification and development of [[Buddhism]] and are consistent with the schematic three periods of historical development proposed by the late [[Venerable]] Tai Hsu. The latter were as follows:
+
 
 +
 
 +
It also categorised the [[Dharma]] according to [[practice]] as: [[Catvri-satyani]], [[Paramita]], and [[greed]]-ingrained.
 +
 
 +
These classifications are indicative of the diversification and [[development]] of [[Buddhism]] and are consistent with the {{Wiki|schematic}} [[three periods]] of historical [[development]] proposed by the late [[Venerable]] [[Tai Hsu]].  
 +
 
 +
 
 +
The [[latter]] were as follows:
  
 
*    First 500 years after [[Buddha]]'s demise - [[Hinayana]] in vogue with [[Mahayana]] in the background. The [[Pali]] [[Tipitaka]] are representative of the [[Buddhism]] of this period.
 
*    First 500 years after [[Buddha]]'s demise - [[Hinayana]] in vogue with [[Mahayana]] in the background. The [[Pali]] [[Tipitaka]] are representative of the [[Buddhism]] of this period.
*    Second 500 years - [[Mahayana]] to the fore with [[Hinayana]] attendant. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] reflects the development of [[Buddhism]] in this period.
+
*    Second 500 years - [[Mahayana]] to the fore with [[Hinayana]] attendant. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] reflects the [[development]] of [[Buddhism]] in this period.
 
*    Third 500 years - [[Tantric]] [[Buddhism]] took the lead, leaving the [[exoteric]] school in its wake. The [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]] is the fruit of this period.
 
*    Third 500 years - [[Tantric]] [[Buddhism]] took the lead, leaving the [[exoteric]] school in its wake. The [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]] is the fruit of this period.
 
[[File:42a364.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:42a364.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 +
 +
 
[[Chinese Buddhism]] - from which [[Japanese Buddhism]] derives is representative of the [[Buddhism]] of the second 500 years, i.e. it is founded mainly on [[Bodhisattvayana]], which links the earlier [[Sravakayana]] and the later [[Buddhayana]]. It therefore effectively ties [[Buddhist]] history together.
 
[[Chinese Buddhism]] - from which [[Japanese Buddhism]] derives is representative of the [[Buddhism]] of the second 500 years, i.e. it is founded mainly on [[Bodhisattvayana]], which links the earlier [[Sravakayana]] and the later [[Buddhayana]]. It therefore effectively ties [[Buddhist]] history together.
  
As it plays such a pivotal role in the historical development of the [[Buddha]]-[[dharma]], the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] deserves the special [[attention]] of all those concerned with the present development of [[world]] [[Buddhism]]. It is my humble opinion that only in the study of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] can the contents of [[Buddhism]] be fully and totally understood. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] offers the following:
+
As it plays such a pivotal role in the historical [[development]] of the [[Buddha-dharma]], the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] deserves the special [[attention]] of all those concerned with the {{Wiki|present}} [[development]] of [[world]] [[Buddhism]]. It is my [[humble]] opinion that only in the study of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] can the contents of [[Buddhism]] be fully and totally understood. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] offers the following:
 +
 
 +
'''(a)''' [[Agamas]]: All four [[Agamas]] belong to the [[Bhava]] [[division]].
 +
 
 +
The [[Madhyamagama]] and [[Samyuktagama]] were translated from the texts of the [[Sravastivada]] school while the [[Dirghagama]] and [[Ekottaragama]] were translated from those of the [[Mahasamghika]] or [[Vibbajyavada]] schools.
 +
 
 +
Though admittedly it does not contain a complete set of the [[sutras]] of any single school, (the [[Pali]] [[Tripitaka]] does {{Wiki|present}} a more complete set), a textual conglomeration of many schools does have its [[merits]] (The [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]] contains no [[Agama]] at all).
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
'''(b)''' [[Vinayas]]: The [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]] contains only the new {{Wiki|rules}} of the [[Tamrasatiya]] [[sect]], while the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Vinaya]] contains all the following:
  
'''(a)''' [[Agamas]]: All four [[Agamas]] belong to the [[Bhava]] division. The [[Madhyamagama]] and [[Samyuktagama]] were translated from the texts of the [[Sravastivada]] school while the [[Dirghagama]] and [[Ekottaragama]] were translated from those of the [[Mahasamghika]] or [[Vibbajyavada]] schools. Though admittedly it does not contain a complete set of the [[sutras]] of any single school, (the [[Pali]] [[Tripitaka]] does present a more complete set), a textual conglomeration of many schools does have its [[merits]] (The [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]] contains no [[Agama]] at all).
 
  
'''(b)''' [[Vinayas]]: The [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]] contains only the new rules of the [[Tamrasatiya]] sect, while the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Vinaya]] contains all the following:
 
  
 
:(i) The [[Mahasamghika]] [[Vinaya]] of the [[Mahasamghika school]].
 
:(i) The [[Mahasamghika]] [[Vinaya]] of the [[Mahasamghika school]].
:(ii) The five divisions of the [[Mahisasaka Vinaya]], the four divisions of the [[Dharmagupta Vinaya]], the [[pratimoksa]] of [[Mahadasyapiyah]], and the [[Sudarsana Vinaya]] of [[Tamrasatiya]]. All these are rules of the [[Vibbajyavada]] school.
+
 
 +
 
 +
:(ii) The five divisions of the [[Mahisasaka Vinaya]], the four divisions of the [[Dharmagupta Vinaya]], the [[pratimoksa]] of [[Mahadasyapiyah]], and the [[Sudarsana Vinaya]] of [[Tamrasatiya]]. All these are {{Wiki|rules}} of the [[Vibbajyavada]] school.
 +
 
 +
 
 
:(iii) The old [[Sravastivada Vinaya]] and the new [[Mulasarvasti vadanikaya Vinaya]], both of the [[Sarvastivada school]].
 
:(iii) The old [[Sravastivada Vinaya]] and the new [[Mulasarvasti vadanikaya Vinaya]], both of the [[Sarvastivada school]].
:(iv) The Twenty-Two-Points-Of-Elucidation [[Sastras]] of the [[Sammatiya]] sect of the [[Vatsiputriyas]] school.
+
 
This rich collection of materials from different sources greatly facilitates comparative studies of sectarian [[Buddhism]].
+
 
 +
:(iv) The Twenty-Two-Points-Of-Elucidation [[Sastras]] of the [[Sammatiya]] [[sect]] of the [[Vatsiputriyas]] school.
 +
 
 +
This rich collection of materials from different sources greatly facilitates comparative studies of {{Wiki|sectarian}} [[Buddhism]].
 +
 
 
[[File:4155433.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:4155433.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
'''(c)''' [[Abhidharmas]]: This [[body]] of [[scripture]] is common to the three main schools of [[Theravada Buddhism]], namely, the Vibhajyavadins, the [[Sarvastivadins]], and the [[Vatsiputriyas]]. In the [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]] there are only the [[Prajnapti]] of the Jnanaaprasthanasatpadabhidharma and the later [[Abhidarmakosa]].
+
'''(c)''' [[Abhidharmas]]: This [[body]] of [[scripture]] is common to the three main schools of [[Theravada Buddhism]], namely, the [[Vibhajyavadins]], the [[Sarvastivadins]], and the [[Vatsiputriyas]]. In the [[Tibetan Tripitaka]] there are only the [[Prajnapti]] of the [[Jnanaaprasthanasatpadabhidharma]] and the later [[Abhidarmakosa]].
 +
 
  
 
The [[Pali]] [[Tripitaka]] contains seven [[Sastras]]. While the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] has an especially large collection of the work of the [[Sarvastivada school]], it also possesses the [[Abhidharma]] work of practically all sects. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] contains:
 
The [[Pali]] [[Tripitaka]] contains seven [[Sastras]]. While the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] has an especially large collection of the work of the [[Sarvastivada school]], it also possesses the [[Abhidharma]] work of practically all sects. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] contains:
  
 
:i) The [[Samgitiparyaya]], the [[Dharmaskandha]], the [[Prajnapti]], the [[Vijnanakaya]], the [[Dhatukaya]], the [[Prakaranapada]], the [[Jnanaprasthana]], the [[Mahavibhasa]], the [[Abhidharma-hrdaya-vyakhya]], the [[Abhiraharmananyanyanusara]] and the [[Abhidharmasamayapradipika Sastras]] of the [[Sarvastivada school]].
 
:i) The [[Samgitiparyaya]], the [[Dharmaskandha]], the [[Prajnapti]], the [[Vijnanakaya]], the [[Dhatukaya]], the [[Prakaranapada]], the [[Jnanaprasthana]], the [[Mahavibhasa]], the [[Abhidharma-hrdaya-vyakhya]], the [[Abhiraharmananyanyanusara]] and the [[Abhidharmasamayapradipika Sastras]] of the [[Sarvastivada school]].
:ii) Of the works of Vibhajyavadins, it includes the [[Abhidharma]] [[Sastra]] of Sariputa, which is the only important work that links up the Southern and Northern [[Abhidharmas]].
+
 
 +
:ii) Of the works of [[Vibhajyavadins]], it includes the [[Abhidharma Sastra]] of Sariputa, which is the only important work that links up the Southern and Northern [[Abhidharmas]].
 
:iii) It also contains the [[Vimmuttimagga]] which is a different version of the [[Pali]] [[Visuddhimagga]].
 
:iii) It also contains the [[Vimmuttimagga]] which is a different version of the [[Pali]] [[Visuddhimagga]].
 +
 
:iv) It further contains the [[Sammitiya Sastra]] of the [[Vatsiputriya]] School.
 
:iv) It further contains the [[Sammitiya Sastra]] of the [[Vatsiputriya]] School.
 +
 
:v) The renowned [[Abhidharmakosa]] of the third to fourth century which combines the best teachings of the [[Sarvastivada]] and [[Sautrantika]] schools, and the [[Satyasiddi Sastra]] of [[Harivarman]] which greatly influenced [[Chinese Buddhism]].
 
:v) The renowned [[Abhidharmakosa]] of the third to fourth century which combines the best teachings of the [[Sarvastivada]] and [[Sautrantika]] schools, and the [[Satyasiddi Sastra]] of [[Harivarman]] which greatly influenced [[Chinese Buddhism]].
  
All these treasures of the [[Abhidharma]] may be found in the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]]. It can thus be seen that although the works of earlier dates in the [[Tripitaka]] were not given the full [[respect]] due them by the majority of {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Buddhists]], the [[wealth]] of [[information]] they contain will be of great reference value to anyone interested in tracing the divisions of the [[Sravaka]] schools and the development of the [[Bodhisattva ideal]] from the [[Sravakayana]]. If these scriptures are ignored, I will say that it would definitely not be possible for anyone to fulfil the responsibility of coordinating and linking the many branches of [[world]] [[Buddhism]].
+
All these [[treasures]] of the [[Abhidharma]] may be found in the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]].  
 +
 
 +
It can thus be seen that although the works of earlier dates in the [[Tripitaka]] were not given the full [[respect]] due them by the majority of {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Buddhists]], the [[wealth]] of [[information]] they contain will be of great reference value to anyone [[interested]] in tracing the divisions of the [[Sravaka]] schools and the [[development]] of the [[Bodhisattva ideal]] from the [[Sravakayana]].  
 +
 
 +
If these [[scriptures]] are ignored, I will say that it would definitely not be possible for anyone to fulfil the {{Wiki|responsibility}} of coordinating and linking the many branches of [[world]] [[Buddhism]].
 +
 
  
 
'''(d)''' [[Mahayana scriptures]] of the [[Sunyavada]].
 
'''(d)''' [[Mahayana scriptures]] of the [[Sunyavada]].
 
[[File:72p.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:72p.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
'''(e)''' [[Mahayana scriptures]] of the noumenon school, or the school of [[eternal]]-[[reality]], are very complete in the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]]. These scriptures are very similar to those found in the [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]]. The four great [[Sutras]], the [[Prajnaparamita]], the [[Avatamsaka]], the [[Mahasamghata]], and the [[Mahaparinirvana]] (to which may be added the [[Maharatnakuta Sutra]], making five great [[sutras]]), are all tremendously voluminous works. Here it may be pointed out that the {{Wiki|Chinese}} scriptures are particularly notable for the following characteristics:
+
'''(e)''' [[Mahayana scriptures]] of the {{Wiki|noumenon}} school, or the school of [[eternal]]-[[reality]], are very complete in the [[Chinese Tripitaka]].  
 +
 
 +
These [[scriptures]] are very similar to those found in the [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]].  
 +
 
 +
The four great [[Sutras]], the [[Prajnaparamita]], the [[Avatamsaka]], the [[Mahasamghata]], and the [[Mahaparinirvana]] (to which may be added the [[Maharatnakuta Sutra]], making five great [[sutras]]), are all tremendously voluminous works.  
 +
 
 +
Here it may be pointed out that the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[scriptures]] are particularly notable for the following [[characteristics]]:
 +
 
 +
:(i) The different translations of the same [[Sutra]] have been safely preserved in the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] in their respective original versions without their being constantly revised according to later translations, as was the case with [[Tibetan]] [[scriptures]].
 +
 
 +
From a study of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations we can thus trace the changes in content which the majority of [[scriptures]] have undergone over time and reflect upon the changes in the original [[Indian]] texts at different points in time. Thus we have the [[benefit]] of more than one version for reference, recording the [[evolution]] of the [[scriptures]].
 +
 
 +
 
 +
:(ii) The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Mahayana scriptures]] that were translated before the Tsin Dynasties (beginning 265 C.E.) are particularly related to the [[Buddhism]] of {{Wiki|Chinese}} {{Wiki|Turkestan}} with its centre in the mountain areas of {{Wiki|Kashmir}}.
 +
 
 +
These [[scriptures]] [[form]] a strong nucleus of {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Buddhist]] [[thinking]]. The translations of the [[Dasabhumika Sastra]] and [[Lankavatara Sutra]] all possess very special [[characteristics]].
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
'''(f)''' [[Madhyamika]]: The [[Madhyamika]] texts of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] are considerably different from the [[Tibetan]] renditions of the same system of [[thought]].
 +
 
 +
The {{Wiki|Chinese}} collection consists mostly of earlier works, particularly those of [[Nagarjuna]], such as the [[Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra]] and the [[Dasabhumikavibhasa]] [[Sastra]], which not only {{Wiki|present}} [[Madhyamika]] [[philosophy]] of a very high order but also illustrate extensively the acts of a [[Bodhisattva]].
  
:(i) The different translations of the same [[Sutra]] have been safely preserved in the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] in their respective original versions without their being constantly revised according to later translations, as was the case with [[Tibetan]] scriptures. From a study of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations we can thus trace the changes in content which the majority of scriptures have undergone over time and reflect upon the changes in the original [[Indian]] texts at different points in time. Thus we have the benefit of more than one version for reference, recording the evolution of the scriptures.
 
:(ii) The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Mahayana scriptures]] that were translated before the Tsin Dynasties (beginning 265 C.E.) are particularly related to the [[Buddhism]] of {{Wiki|Chinese}} Turkestan with its centre in the mountain areas of {{Wiki|Kashmir}}. These scriptures [[form]] a strong nucleus of {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Buddhist]] [[thinking]]. The translations of the [[Dasabhumika Sastra]] and [[Lankavatara Sutra]] all possess very special characteristics.
 
  
'''(f)''' [[Madhyamika]]: The [[Madhyamika]] texts of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] are considerably different from the [[Tibetan]] renditions of the same system of [[thought]]. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} collection consists mostly of earlier works, particularly those of [[Nagarjuna]], such as the [[Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra]] and the Dasabhumikavibhasa [[Sastra]], which not only present [[Madhyamika]] [[philosophy]] of a very high order but also illustrate extensively the acts of a [[Bodhisattva]].
 
 
[[File:78p.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:78p.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
Of the late [[Madhyamika]] works, i.e. works produced by the [[disciples]] of [[Nagarjuna]] after the rise of the [[Yogacara]] system, only the Prajnapradipa [[Sastra]] of [[Bhavaviveka]] has been rendered into {{Wiki|Chinese}}. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] does not contain works or as many schools of this system as the [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]]. The [[Mahayanavataraka Sastra]] of [[Saramati]] and the [[Madhyayata Sastra]] of [[Asanga]] clearly indicate the [[change]] of [[thinking]] from the [[Madhyamika]] to the [[Yogacara]] system.
+
Of the late [[Madhyamika]] works, i.e. works produced by the [[disciples]] of [[Nagarjuna]] after the rise of the [[Yogacara]] system, only the Prajnapradipa [[Sastra]] of [[Bhavaviveka]] has been rendered into {{Wiki|Chinese}}.  
 +
 
 +
The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] does not contain works or as many schools of this system as the [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]].  
 +
 
 +
The [[Mahayanavataraka Sastra]] of [[Saramati]] and the [[Madhyayata Sastra]] of [[Asanga]] clearly indicate the change of [[thinking]] from the [[Madhyamika]] to the [[Yogacara]] system.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
'''(g)''' [[Yogacara]]-[[Vijnanavada]]: The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] contains a very complete collection of this system of [[thought]].
 +
 
 +
It includes important [[scriptures]] such as the [[Dasabhumika]], [[Mahayanasamparigraha Sastra]], and [[Vijnaptimatrasiddhi Sastra]].
 +
 
 +
While the [[Tibetan]] system was mainly founded on the teachings of [[Sthiramati]] which are more akin to the [[Mahayanasamparigraha]] school of {{Wiki|Chinese}} work, the {{Wiki|Chinese}} students of [[orthodox]] [[Vijnanavada]] follow the teachings of [[Dharmapala]].
  
'''(g)''' [[Yogacara]]-[[Vijnanavada]]: The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] contains a very complete collection of this system of [[thought]]. It includes important scriptures such as the [[Dasabhumika]], [[Mahayanasamparigraha Sastra]], and [[Vijnaptimatrasiddhi Sastra]]. While the [[Tibetan]] system was mainly founded on the teachings of [[Sthiramati]] which are more akin to the [[Mahayanasamparigraha]] school of {{Wiki|Chinese}} work, the {{Wiki|Chinese}} students of orthodox [[Vijnanavada]] follow the teachings of [[Dharmapala]].
 
  
The Vinaptimatrasiddhi [[Sastra]], which represents the consummation of the [[Dignaga]]-[[Dharmapala]]-Silabhadra school of [[thought]], is a [[gem]] of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]]. The Hetuvidya which is closely connected with [[Vijnanavada]], is not fully translated in the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] and cannot compare favourably with the works of [[Dignaga]] and [[Dharmakirti]] collected in the [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]].
+
The [[Vinaptimatrasiddhi]] [[Sastra]], which represents the consummation of the [[Dignaga]]-[[Dharmapala]]-[[Silabhadra]] school of [[thought]], is a [[gem]] of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]].  
This seems to indicate that the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[people]] were not [[logically]] inclined, and gives no weight to engagements in [[verbal]] gymnastics and [[debates]]. In times past this had relegated the position of [[Sastra]] [[masters]] in [[China]] to one of [[relative]] unimportance.
 
  
'''(h)''' The [[esoteric]] [[Yoga]]: The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] includes {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations of both the [[Vairocana]] [[Sutra]] of the practical division, and the [[Diamond Crown Sutra]] of the [[Yoga]] division of the [[Tantric]] school of [[Buddhism]]. The only [[esoteric]] scriptures that are missing are those of the [[Supreme Yoga]] division which, as they arrived in [[China]] at a time of national chaos, did not have much chance to circulate widely. Its very nature of achieving [[enlightenment]] through carnal expressions also made [[Tantrism]] unacceptable to the {{Wiki|Chinese}} intellectuals. However, the texts of [[esoteric]] [[Yoga]] are abundant in the [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]].
+
The [[Hetuvidya]] which is closely connected with [[Vijnanavada]], is not fully translated in the [[Chinese Tripitaka]] and cannot compare favourably with the works of [[Dignaga]] and [[Dharmakirti]] collected in the [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]].
 +
 
 +
 
 +
This seems to indicate that the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[people]] were not [[logically]] inclined, and gives no {{Wiki|weight}} to engagements in [[verbal]] gymnastics and [[debates]]. In times {{Wiki|past}} this had relegated the position of [[Sastra]] [[masters]] in [[China]] to one of [[relative]] unimportance.
 +
 
 +
'''(h)''' The [[esoteric]] [[Yoga]]: The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] includes {{Wiki|Chinese}} translations of both the [[Vairocana]] [[Sutra]] of the {{Wiki|practical}} [[division]], and the [[Diamond Crown Sutra]] of the [[Yoga]] [[division]] of the [[Tantric]] school of [[Buddhism]].  
 +
 
 +
The only [[esoteric]] [[scriptures]] that are missing are those of the [[Supreme Yoga]] [[division]] which, as they arrived in [[China]] at a time of national {{Wiki|chaos}}, did not have much chance to circulate widely.  
 +
 
 +
Its very [[nature]] of achieving [[enlightenment]] through carnal {{Wiki|expressions}} also made [[Tantrism]] unacceptable to the {{Wiki|Chinese}} intellectuals.  
 +
 
 +
However, the texts of [[esoteric]] [[Yoga]] are abundant in the [[Tibetan]] [[Tripitaka]].
 
[[File:91063885.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:91063885.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
From the above it can be seen that the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] is composed mainly of [[Mahayana scriptures]] of the second 500 years, yet translations were not restricted to scriptures of this middle period. The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] also possesses a [[wealth]] of works of [[early Buddhism]] as a good portion of the later productions.
 
  
Thus, if one could have a sufficient [[knowledge]] of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]], and could extend his [[knowledge]] from there to include the [[Pali]] [[Tripitaka]] of the [[Sravakayana]], and the [[Madhyamika]] and [[Supreme Yoga]] of the [[Tibetan]] system, then he would have little difficulty in gaining an accurate, complete and comprehensive panorama of the 1,700 years of development of [[Indian Buddhism]], the record of which has been preserved in the three great extant schools of [[Buddhist]] [[thought]].
+
From the above it can be seen that the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] is composed mainly of [[Mahayana scriptures]] of the second 500 years, yet translations were not restricted to [[scriptures]] of this middle period.
 +
 
 +
The {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]] also possesses a [[wealth]] of works of [[early Buddhism]] as a good portion of the later productions.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
Thus, if one could have a sufficient [[knowledge]] of the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]], and could extend his [[knowledge]] from there to include the [[Pali]] [[Tripitaka]] of the [[Sravakayana]], and the [[Madhyamika]] and [[Supreme Yoga]] of the [[Tibetan]] system, then he would have little difficulty in gaining an accurate, complete and comprehensive panorama of the 1,700 years of [[development]] of [[Indian Buddhism]], the record of which has been preserved in the three great extant schools of [[Buddhist]] [[thought]].
 
[[File:9.11.12.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
 
[[File:9.11.12.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
The late [[Venerable]] Tai Hsu once said, "To mold a new, critical and comprehensive system, based on the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]], the [[Theravada]] teaching of Ceylon, and selected components of the [[Tibetan canon]], should be the objective of the [[writing]] of a history of [[Indian Buddhism]]." Even more so, it should be the objective of coordinating and connecting the many tributaries of [[world]] [[Buddhism]]. It is our responsibility to discard the trimmings and to retain the very essence of the great Tripitakas, adapting [[Buddhism]] to the modern [[world]] so that it may fulfil its mission of leading the way, taking under its wings the miserable beings of the present era.
 
  
Translated by Mok Chung, edited by Mick Kiddle, proofread by Neng Rong. (20-6-1995)  
+
The late [[Venerable]] Tai Hsu once said, "To mold a new, critical and comprehensive system, based on the {{Wiki|Chinese}} [[Tripitaka]], the [[Theravada]] [[teaching]] of [[Ceylon]], and selected components of the [[Tibetan canon]], should be the [[objective]] of the [[writing]] of a history of [[Indian Buddhism]]."
 +
 
 +
Even more so, it should be the [[objective]] of coordinating and connecting the many tributaries of [[world]] [[Buddhism]].
 +
 
 +
It is our {{Wiki|responsibility}} to discard the trimmings and to retain the very [[essence]] of the great [[Tripitakas]], adapting [[Buddhism]] to the {{Wiki|modern}} [[world]] so that it may fulfil its [[mission]] of leading the way, taking under its wings the [[miserable]] [[beings]] of the {{Wiki|present}} {{Wiki|era}}.
 +
 
 +
Translated by Mok [[Chung]], edited by Mick Kiddle, proofread by [[Neng]] [[Rong]]. (20-6-1995)  
  
  
Line 185: Line 470:
 
[[Smaller Sukhavati-vyuha Sutra]].<br>
 
[[Smaller Sukhavati-vyuha Sutra]].<br>
 
[[Sutra of Amida]].<br>
 
[[Sutra of Amida]].<br>
| height="82" bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the three [[sutras]] that [[form]] the doctrinal basis of the [[Pureland]] School - the two others are [[Meditation]] [[Sutra]] and Longer [[Amitabha]] [[Sutra]]. It describes the [[Blessings]] and [[Virtues]] of [[Amitabha]] [[Buddha]] and his [[Pureland]], and discusses [[rebirth]].<br>
+
| height="82" bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the three [[sutras]] that [[form]] the [[doctrinal]] basis of the [[Pureland]] School - the two others are [[Meditation]] [[Sutra]] and Longer [[Amitabha]] [[Sutra]]. It describes the [[Blessings]] and [[Virtues]] of [[Amitabha]] [[Buddha]] and his [[Pureland]], and discusses [[rebirth]].<br>
 
|-
 
|-
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Avatamsaka]]</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Avatamsaka]]</strong></div>
Line 191: Line 476:
 
[[Flower Garland Sutra]].<br>
 
[[Flower Garland Sutra]].<br>
 
[[Flower Adornment Sutra]]. [[Gandavyuha Sutra]].
 
[[Flower Adornment Sutra]]. [[Gandavyuha Sutra]].
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | Second longest [[sutra]] in the [[Mahayana]] Canon, (40 chapters). It consists of large important, independent [[sutras]], namely: [[Gandavyuha Sutra]], Dashabhumika [[Sutra]], [[Amitayurdyhana Sutra]]. It records the higher teaching of the [[Buddha]] to [[Bodhisattvas]] and other high [[spiritual]] beings.<br>
+
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | Second longest [[sutra]] in the [[Mahayana]] [[Canon]], (40 chapters). It consists of large important, {{Wiki|independent}} [[sutras]], namely: [[Gandavyuha Sutra]], [[Dashabhumika]] [[Sutra]], [[Amitayurdyhana Sutra]]. It records the higher [[teaching]] of the [[Buddha]] to [[Bodhisattvas]] and other high [[spiritual]] [[beings]].<br>
 
|-
 
|-
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Brahma]] Net</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Brahma]] Net</strong></div>
Line 197: Line 482:
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | This contains the [[Ten Major Precepts]] of [[Mahayana]] followers, and the [[Bodhisattva Precepts]].<br>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | This contains the [[Ten Major Precepts]] of [[Mahayana]] followers, and the [[Bodhisattva Precepts]].<br>
 
|-
 
|-
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>Diamond</strong></div>
+
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Diamond]]</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" | [[Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra]].
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" | [[Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra]].
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the two most famous scriptures in the [[Prajnaparamita]] group of [[sutras]] (the other is the [[Heart Sutra]]). The [[Diamond Sutra]] sets forth the [[doctrines]] of [[Sunyata]] ([[emptiness]]) and [[Prajna]] ([[wisdom]]).<br>
+
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the two most famous [[scriptures]] in the [[Prajnaparamita]] group of [[sutras]] (the other is the [[Heart Sutra]]). The [[Diamond Sutra]] sets forth the [[doctrines]] of [[Sunyata]] ([[emptiness]]) and [[Prajna]] ([[wisdom]]).<br>
 
|-
 
|-
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Heart]]</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Heart]]</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" | [[Prajnaparamita-Hrdaya Sutra]].
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" | [[Prajnaparamita-Hrdaya Sutra]].
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the smallest [[sutras]], and with the [[Diamond Sutra]], one of the most popular of the 40 [[sutras]], in the vast [[Prajnaparamita]] literature. Its emphasis is on [[emptiness]].
+
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the smallest [[sutras]], and with the [[Diamond Sutra]], one of the most popular of the 40 [[sutras]], in the vast [[Prajnaparamita]] {{Wiki|literature}}. Its {{Wiki|emphasis}} is on [[emptiness]].
 
|-
 
|-
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>Heroic Gate</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>Heroic Gate</strong></div>
Line 209: Line 494:
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | Emphasises the [[power]] of [[Samadhi]] ([[meditation]]) and explains various methods of [[emptiness]] [[meditation]]. A key text of the [[Ch'an]] and [[Zen]] [[traditions]].<br>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | Emphasises the [[power]] of [[Samadhi]] ([[meditation]]) and explains various methods of [[emptiness]] [[meditation]]. A key text of the [[Ch'an]] and [[Zen]] [[traditions]].<br>
 
|-
 
|-
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>Jewel Heap</strong></div>
+
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Jewel]] Heap</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" | [[Ratnakuta Sutra]].
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" | [[Ratnakuta Sutra]].
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the oldest [[sutras]], which belongs to the [[Vaipulya]] group of 49 independent [[sutras]]. <br>
+
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the oldest [[sutras]], which belongs to the [[Vaipulya]] group of 49 {{Wiki|independent}} [[sutras]]. <br>
Summary: The [[philosophy]] of the middle is developed, which later becomes the basis for the [[Madhyamaka]] teaching of Najarjuna. It contains [[sutras]] on [[transcendental]] [[wisdom]] ([[Prajnaparamita Sutra]]) and the Longer [[Amitabha]] [[Sutra]].<br><br>
+
Summary: The [[philosophy]] of the middle is developed, which later becomes the basis for the [[Madhyamaka]] [[teaching]] of Najarjuna. It contains [[sutras]] on [[transcendental]] [[wisdom]] ([[Prajnaparamita Sutra]]) and the Longer [[Amitabha]] [[Sutra]].<br><br>
 
|-
 
|-
 
| height="80" bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Lankavatara]]</strong></div>
 
| height="80" bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Lankavatara]]</strong></div>
 
| height="80" bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" |
 
| height="80" bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" |
| height="80" bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | A scriptural basis of the [[Yogacara]] and [[Zen]] Schools. It teaches subjective {{Wiki|idealism}} based on the [[Buddha]]'s [[enlightenment]], and [[doctrines]] of [[emptiness]] and [[mind only]].<br>
+
| height="80" bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | A [[scriptural]] basis of the [[Yogacara]] and [[Zen]] Schools. It teaches [[subjective]] {{Wiki|idealism}} based on the [[Buddha]]'s [[enlightenment]], and [[doctrines]] of [[emptiness]] and [[mind only]].<br>
 
|-
 
|-
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>Longer [[Amitabha]]</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>Longer [[Amitabha]]</strong></div>
Line 233: Line 518:
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the three core texts of the [[Pureland]] school. It teaches [[meditation]] and [[visualisation]].<br><br>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | One of the three core texts of the [[Pureland]] school. It teaches [[meditation]] and [[visualisation]].<br><br>
 
|-
 
|-
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>Ten Stages Chapter</strong></div>
+
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Ten Stages]] [[Chapter]]</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" | [[Dasabhumika Sutra]].<br>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" | [[Dasabhumika Sutra]].<br>
[[Sutra]] on the Ten Stages.
+
[[Sutra]] on the [[Ten Stages]].
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | This [[sutra]] is the 26th chapter of [[Avatamsaka Sutra]], and is also an independent [[sutra]]. It establishes the ten stages of cultivation that the [[Bodhisattva]] must traverse on the [[path]] to [[enlightenment]].<br>
+
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | This [[sutra]] is the 26th [[chapter]] of [[Avatamsaka Sutra]], and is also an {{Wiki|independent}} [[sutra]]. It establishes the [[ten stages]] of [[cultivation]] that the [[Bodhisattva]] must traverse on the [[path]] to [[enlightenment]].<br>
 
|-
 
|-
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Vimalakirti]]</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFC4" width="136" | <div align="center"><strong>[[Vimalakirti]]</strong></div>
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" |
 
| bgcolor="#FFFFCC" width="216" |
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | This is a [[philosophic]] dramatic {{Wiki|discourse}}, in which basic [[Mahayana]] principles are presented in the [[form]] of a [[conversation]] between famous [[Buddhist]] figures, and the [[householder]], [[Vimalakirti]].
+
| bgcolor="#FFFFE1" width="293" | This is a [[philosophic]] dramatic {{Wiki|discourse}}, in which basic [[Mahayana]] {{Wiki|principles}} are presented in the [[form]] of a [[conversation]] between famous [[Buddhist]] figures, and the [[householder]], [[Vimalakirti]].
 
|}
 
|}
  

Latest revision as of 15:06, 1 March 2015

The Tripitaka (Sanskrit) (Pali: Tipitaka) is the Canon of the Buddhists, both Theravada and Mahayana. Thus it is possible to speak of several Canons such as the Sthaviravada, Sarvastivada and Mahayana as well as in term of languages like Pali, Chinese and Tibetan. The word is used basically to refer to the literature, the authorship of which is directly or indirectly ascribed to the Buddha himself.

Bon-canon250185.jpg

It is generally believed that whatever was the teaching of the Buddha, conceived under Dhamma and Vinaya, it was rehearsed soon after his death by a fairly representative body of disciples. The later systematised threefold division, into Sutta, Vinaya and Abhidhamma is based on this collection. Sharing a common body of Dhamma and Vinaya, the early Buddhist disciples appear to have remained united for about a century.

The Council of Vesali or the second Buddhist Council saw the break up of this original body and as many as eighteen separate schools were known to exist by about the first century B.C. It is reasonable to assume that each of these schools would have opted to possess a Tripitaka of their own or rather their own recension of the Tripitaka, perhaps with a considerably large common core.

It has long been claimed that the Buddha, as he went about teaching in the Gangetic valley in India during the 6th and 5th centuries B.C.E., used Magadhi or the language of Magadha as his medium of communication. Attempts have been made to identify this Magadhan dialect with Pali, the language in which the texts of the Sthaviravada school are recorded. Hence we speak of a Pali Canon, i.e., the literature of the Sthaviravadins which is believed to be the original word of the Buddha.


At any rate, this is the only complete recension we possess and the Pali texts seem to preserve an older tradition much more than most of the extant Buddhist works in other languages. Further, the Sthaviravadins admit two other major divisions of Pali Buddhist literature which are non-Canonical. They are:

1. Post-Canonical Pali literature including works like Petakopadesa and Milindapanha, the authorship of which is ascribed to one or more disciples.
2. Pali Commentarial literature which includes:


(a) Atthakatha or Commentaries, the original version of which is believed to have been taken over to Sri Lanka by Thera Mahinda, the missionary sent by Asoka and
(b) the different strata of Tika or Sub-Commentaries, contributions to which were made by Buddhist monks of Sri Lanka, India and Burma.

Besides this Pali recension of the Sthaviravada school there are fragmentary texts of the Sarvastivada or of the Mulasarvastivada which are preserved in Sanskrit. A large portion of their Vinaya texts in Sanskrit is preserved in the Gilgit manuscripts. But a more complete collection of the Sarvastivada recension (perhaps also of the Dharmapuptaka and Kasyapiya), i.e., a Sanskrit Canon, must have possibly existed as is evident from the Chinese translations preserved to us. These include complete translations of the four agamas (the equivalent of the Pali nikayas). Of the Ksudraka (Pali: Khuddaka), only some texts are preserved in Chinese.

In addition to these, the Chinese translations seem to preserve, to the credit of the Sarvastivadins, a vast Vinaya literature and an independent collection of seven Abhidhamma treatises. Thus what could be referred to as a Sarvastivada Canon ranges between fragments of texts preserved in Sanskrit and the more representative collection of the Tripitaka preserved in Chinese. It may be mentioned here that a version of the Mulasarvastivada Vinaya consisting of seven parts, even more faithful than the Chinese version, is preserved in Tibetan. Of the Abhidharma collection only the Prajnaptisastra appears to have been translated into Tibetan.

002-3.jpg

Speaking further of the Tripitaka in terms of language we have in Chinese different recensions of the Canon (preserved in part) belonging to different schools. These recensions are primarily based on the Tripitaka of Indian origin. In addition to the ancient texts which these recensions preserve they also contain independent expositions of the early doctrines or commentarial literature on them.

The Chinese Canon preserves the Vinaya texts of as many as seven different schools. In place of the division into ‘canonical groups’ of Sutra, Abhidharma and Vinaya, this new arrangement seems to reckon with a live and continuous tradition in accepting as authoritative both the Sutra (or words of Buddha) and Sastra (or commentaries, treatises, etc. of disciples of a later date).

It becomes clear from the foregoing analysis that in speaking of a Buddhist Canon one has to admit that it is both vast in extent and complex in character. While the earlier and more orthodox schools of Buddhism reserved the term Canonical to refer to the Body of literature, the greater part of which could be reasonably ascribed to the Buddha himself, other traditions which developed further away from the centre of activity of the Buddha and at a relatively later date choose to lay under the term Canon the entire mosaic of Buddhist literature in their possession, which is of varied authorship and is at times extremely heterogeneous in character.


The First Rehearsal of the Tipitaka

After the Final Extinction (Parinirvana) of the Buddha, and the cremation of his body, the community of monks chose five hundred Arahants ('worthy ones', 'perfected ones') to work together to compile the doctrine and the discipline, in order to prevent the true doctrine from being submerged in false doctrines. Each of the recensions of the Vinaya now available contains an appendix which narrates how one of the senior monks, Mahakasyapa, presided over this assembly, which worked systematically through everything the Buddha was remembered to have said and produced an agreed canon of texts embodying it.

The versions differ over the details but agree in broad outline. The Arahants met in Rajagrha, since that great city could most easily support such a large assembly for several months. The organisation of the Buddhists tended to centre on great cities as it was apparently not possible in any other way to convene a meeting large enough to be authoritative for the entire community, given its democratic constitution.

Kernbibliotheek1978.jpg

Ananda, who being the Buddha’s personal attendant, had heard the discourses more than anyone else, first recited the ‘doctrine’ (dharma). Mahakasyapa asked him about all the dialogues, etc., he remembered and the assembly endorsed his versions as correct. The doctrine compiled in this way became known as the Sutra Pitaka, the collection of sutras (the term pitaka probably signifies a 'tradition' of a group of texts). The discipline was similarly recited by Upali, a specialist in that subject, and codified as the Vinaya Pitaka. On the third pitaka (Abhidhamma) which should make up the Tipitaka ('Three Pitakas') there is disagreement.

The Sthaviravada and Mahasamghika versions do not mention its recitation, and since the agreement of these two schools should establish the oldest available textual tradition it appears that originally there were only two Pitakas. However, even the Mahasamghika account mentions the Abhidhamma as among the texts handed down after the rehearsal. The Mahisasaka version makes no mention of a third Pitaka.The Sarvastivada and Dharmaguptaka Vinayas on the other hand have Ananda reciting the Abhidhamma as well as the Sutra. The Kasyapiya (=Haimavata) mentions the Abhidhamma Pitaka without saying who recited it.

A later text of the Sarvastivada School, the Asokavadana states that Kasyapa recited the Matrka or Matrka Pitaka (two versions of the text). The same tradition is found in the Vinaya of the Mula Sarvastivada School, a late offshoot of the Sarvastivada which thoroughly revised and enlarged its Tipitaka. 'Whether a Matrka or Abhidhamma was actually recited at the First Rehearsal or not, all the early schools were equipped with a third, Abhidhamma Pitaka.

147ages.jpg

According to the consensus of the schools the Sutra Pitaka was arranged in five agamas, 'traditions' (the usual term, but the Sthaviravadins more often call them nikayas, 'collections').


The order also is generally agreed to be as follows:

(1) Digha Nikaya. ('Long Tradition', about 30 of the longest sutras); (2) Majjhima Nikaya ('Intermediate Tradition', about 150 sutras of intermediate length; the short sutras, the number of which ran into thousands, and were classified in two Ways as) (3) Samyutta Nikaya ('Connected Tradition', sutras classified by topic, for example the sutras on conditioned origination); (4) Anguttara Nikaya ('One Up Tradition', sutras on enumerated items classified according to the numbers of the items in sections of ones, twos, threes . . . up to elevens) ; (5) Khuddaka Nikaya (outside the first four Nikayas, there remained a number of texts regarded by all the schools as of inferior importance, either because they were compositions of followers of the Buddha and not the words of the Master himself, or because they were of doubtful authenticity, these were collected in this 'Minor Tradition').

This order of the five 'traditions' happens also to be the order of their authenticity, probably because it was easier to insert short texts among a large number or to get a composition of doubtful origin admitted to the already doubtful Minor Tradition of a school.

This is soon ascertained by comparing the various available recensions.

It has been suggested that some schools did not have a [[Minor Tradition at all, though they still had some of the minor texts, incorporated in their Vinaya, hence the 'Four Nikayas' are sometimes spoken of as representing the Sutras.

The most noticeable feature of the Minor Tradition is that its texts are for the most part in verse as opposed to the prevailing prose of the rest of the Tipitaka. In other words, whatever else may be said about their authenticity, they are poetic compositions which may stimulate interest in the doctrine but are as remote as possible from being systematic expositions of it.

We have naturally ignored them in investigating the teaching of the Buddha, but they are of much interest in themselves, as literature, and in connection with the popularisation of Buddhism in the centuries following the parinirvana when in fact many of them were composed.


19gmkm.jpg

The First Rehearsal is recorded to have taken place during the rainy season of the first year after the parinirvana, the latter event being the era from which the Buddhists have reckoned their chronology.

It does not now appear to be possible to determine the exact extent and contents of the Tipitaka thus collected, in fact as we have seen it may at first have consisted of only two pitakas, not three, namely the Doctrine and the Discipline.

It is clear that some texts were subsequently added, even before the schisms of the schools, for example the account of the First Rehearsal itself, an account of a second such rehearsal a century later and a number of sutras which actually state that they narrate something which took place after the parinirvana or which refer to events known to have taken place later.

It is interesting that the account in the Vinaya records that at least one monk preferred to disregard the version of the Buddha's discourses collected at this rehearsal and remember his own, as he had received it from the Buddha.

This was Purana, who returned from the South after the Rehearsal. The elders invited him to possess himself of the collection rehearsed but he politely declined. If there were a number of monks in distant parts who missed the First Rehearsal it is likely enough that quite a number of discourses remembered by them and handed down to their pupils existed, which were missed at the Rehearsal though perfectly authentic. Under these conditions it would seem reasonable to incorporate such discourses in the Tipitaka later, despite the risk of accepting unauthentic texts.


The Mahaparinirvana Sutra makes the Buddha himself lay down a rule to cover just this situation: if someone claims to be in possession of an authentic text not in the Sutras or in the Vinaya - again two pitakas only - it should be checked against the Sutra and Vinaya and accepted only if it agrees with them.

Such agreement or disagreement may have seemed obvious enough at first. Later it was far from obvious and depended on subtle interpretations; thus the schools came to accept many new texts, some of which surely contained new doctrines.


It appears that during the Buddha's lifetime and for some centuries afterwards nothing was written down: not because writing was not in use at the time but because it was not customary to use it for study and teaching. It was used in commerce and administration, in other words for ephemeral purposes; scholars and philosophers disdained it, for to them to study a text presupposed knowing it by heart.

To preserve a large corpus of texts meant simply the proper organisation of the available manpower. 'Few monks at any period seem to have' known the whole Tripitaka.

The original division of the Sutras into several agamas, 'traditions', seems primarily to have reflected what monks could reasonably be expected to learn during their training.

Thus in Sri Lanka, at least, in the Sthaviravada School, it is recorded that the monks were organised in groups specialising in each of the agamas or the Vinaya or the Abhidhamma, handing these texts down to their pupils and so maintaining the tradition.

In fact even ten years after his full 'entrance' into the community a monk was expected to know, besides part of the Vinaya discipline obligatory for all, only a part, usually about a third, of his agama, and these basic texts are pointed out in the commentary on the Vinaya.

A monk belonging to the Digha tradition, for example, should know ten of its long sutras, including the Mahaparinivana, the Mahanidana and the Mahasatipatthana.

He was then regarded as competent to teach. Among the Sthaviravadins there were even slight differences of opinion on certain matters between the several traditions of the sutras. Thus the Digha tradition did not admit the Avadanas to have been a text authenticated by recital at the First Rehearsal, whereas the Madhyama tradition did: they thus differed as to the extent of the Tipitaka.

77955.jpg


If there were a standard Tipitaka as established at the First Rehearsal one might expect its texts to be fixed in their actual wording, and therefore in their language. This, however ' does not appear to have been the case.

The followers of the Buddha were drawn even during his lifetime from many different countries and spoke, if not completely different languages, at least different dialects.

It has been shown that the early Buddhists observed the principle of adopting the local languages wherever they taught. Probably they owe much of their success in spreading the Doctrine and establishing it in many countries to this.

The Buddha himself is recorded to have enjoined his followers to remember his teaching in their own languages, not in his language, nor in the archaic but respectable cadences of the Vedic scriptures of the Brahmans.

The recensions of the Tipitaka preserved in different countries of India therefore differed in dialect or language from the earliest times, and we cannot speak of any 'original' language of the Buddhist canon, nor, as it happens, have we any definite information as to what language the Buddha himself spoke.'

At the most, we can say that the recension in the language of Magadha may have enjoyed some pre-eminence for the first few centuries, since 'Magadhisms' have been detected even in non-Magahi Buddhist texts. This may have reflected the political supremacy of Magadha.


The British Library / University of Washington Early Buddhist Manuscripts Project was founded in September 1996 in order to promote the study, editing, and publication of a unique collection of fifty-seven fragments of Buddhist manuscripts on birch bark scrolls, written in the Kharosthi script and the Gandhari (Prakrit) language that were acquired by the British Library in 1994.

The manuscripts date from, most likely, the first century A.D., and as such are the oldest surviving Buddhist texts, which promise to provide unprecedented insights into the early history of Buddhism in north India and in central and east Asia.


Extract from an article by Dalya Alberge

87250-84352.jpg

The British Library has discovered remarkable manuscript fragments which it says may be as significant for Buddhist scholars as the Dead Sea Scrolls are for [[Wikipedia:Christianity|Christianity]] and Judaism. The manuscripts, birchbark scrolls that look like "badly rolled up cigars" when first shown to the library, are believed to be the earliest surviving Buddhist text. The exact origin is unknown beyond that they were probably found in Afghanistan in earthen jars.

"These will allow scholars to get nearer to what Buddha said than ever before,"the deputy director of the library's Oriental and Indian Office Collection, Mr Graham Shaw said. They date from the end of the first century AD or the beginning of the second century AD. Apart from bringing scholars closer to the original language of the Buddha, this could corroborate the authenticity of teachings recounted in later text.

The manuscripts include 60 fragments, ranging from the Buddha's sermons to poems and treatises on the psychology of perception. The library acquired them 18 months ago from a British dealer. "Their value was incalculable", Mr Shaw said.

" How would you put a value on the Dead Sea Scrolls?" It is believed they are part of the long-lost canon of the Sarvastivadin Sect that dominated Gandhara - modern north Pakistan and east Afghanistan - and was instrumental in Buddhism's spread into central and east Asia.

Gandhara was one of the greatest ancient centres of Buddhism.

Mr Shaw explained: "The scrolls tell us something about the way Buddhists passed on the teachings, which were for a long time passed on orally." After the Buddha's death, his disciples are said to have gathered in assemblies where they recited his sermons and organised them into what came to be the Buddhist canon.

95 200.jpg

Although nothing is known of their provenance, their attribution has been confirmed by the University of Seattle's Professor Richard Salomon, one of the world's greatest scholars of Kharosthi - a script derived from the Aramaic alphabet that was restricted to a small area of India.

They were, he said, "the Dead Sea Scrolls of Buddhism". Years of study lay ahead before the text can be deciphered, analysed and compared with existing texts.

The fragments include tales told on Lake Anavatapata's banks at an assembly of the Buddha and his disciples. Another is one of the Buddha's sermons on the rhinoceros horn (Suttanipata).

"The rhinoceros and its horn in particular is a symbol of non-attachment to material things ... it is not a herd animal. It just wanders alone."


The Pali Canon

The Pali Canon is the complete scripture collection of the Theravada school. As such, it is the only set of scriptures preserved in the language of its composition.

It is called the Tipitaka or "Three Baskets" because it includes the Vinaya Pitaka or "Basket of Discipline," the Sutta Pitaka or "Basket of Discourses," and the Abhidhamma Pitaka or "Basket of Higher Teachings".

Tipitaka chart.gif


The Tibetan Canon

The Tibetan Canon which consists of two parts:


(1) the bKángjur ("Translation of the Word of the Buddha"), pronounced Kanjur, and

(2) the bStan-'gyur ("Translations of the Teachings") pronounced Tanjur.


Because this latter collection contains works attributed to individuals other than the Buddha, it is considered only semi-canonical.

The first printing of the Kanjur occurred not in Tibet, but in China (Beijing), being completed in 1411.

The first Tibetan edition of the canon was at sNar-tang with the Kanjur appearing in 1731, followed by the Tanjur in 1742.

Other famous editions of the canon were printed at Derge and Co-ne.

5-tibetan book.jpg


(a) bKángjur (Kanjur): Translation of the Word of the Buddha; 98 Volumes (according to the Narthang edition).

  1. Vinaya: 13 Volumes.
  2. Prajnaparamita: 21 Volumes.
  3. Avatamsaka: 6 Volumes.
  4. Ratnakuta: 6 Volumes.
  5. Sutra: 30 Volumes. 270 texts, 75% of which are Mahayana, 25% Hinayana (prominence and precedence being invariably given to Mahayana sutras).
  6. Tantra: 22 Volumes. Contains more than 300 texts.

The second, the Tanjur (bStan-'gyur) is a supplement to the former, or in other words, continuation of the tradition of the Kanjur.

Among its contents are a collection of stories, the commentaries on the Tantra section of the Kanjur and the commentaries on the sutra section.

There are also works relating to Abhidharma and Vinaya as well as Madhyamika and Vijnanavada.

Works coming under the sutra section of the Tanjur are not necessarily commentaries on the texts contained in the Mdo-section of the Kanjur.

They are believed to be authoritative works, some of which, however, are not even Buddhist in character.

They deal with logic, grammar, lexicography, poetry and drama, medicine and chemistry, astrology and divination, painting and biographies of saints.

Their inclusion in this part of the Tibetan Canon is perhaps justified on the acceptance of the position that they are necessary aids and accompaniments in the practice of the religion.


(b) bStan-'gyur (Tanjur): Translations of the Teachings 224 Volumes (3626 texts) according to the Beijing edition.

Images-lamrim.jpg
A. Sutras ("Hymns of Praise"): 1 Volume; 64 texts.
B. Commentaries on the Tantras: 86 Volumes; 3055 texts.
C. Commentaries on Sutras; 137 Volumes; 567 texts.
  1. Prajnaparamita Commentaries, 16 Volumes.
  2. Madhyamika Treatises, 29 Volumes.
  3. Yogacara Treatises, 29 Volumes.
  4. Abhidharma, 8 Volumes.
  5. Miscellaneous Texts, 4 Volumes.
  6. Vinaya Commentaries, 16 Volumes.
  7. Tales and Dramas, 4 Volumes.
  8. Technical Treatises, 43 Volumes.


The Chinese Canon

The Chinese Canon is called the Ta-ts'ang-ching or "Great Scripture Store."

The first complete printing of the "Three Baskets" or Tripitaka was completed in 983 C.E., and known as the Shu-pen or Szechuan edition.

It included 1076 texts in 480 cases. A number of other editions of the modern Chinese Canon were made thereafter.

The now standard modern edition of this work is known as the Taisho Shinshu Daizokyo, published in Tokyo between 1924 and 1929.

It contains 55 volumes containing 2184 texts, along with a supplement of 45 additional volumes.

A fine chapter titled "The Chinese Tripitaka" can be found on pp. 365-368 of Buddhism in China (Princeton University Press), 1964 by Kenneth K.S. Ch'en.


The Chinese Tripitaka in World Buddhism

Flower Garland Sutra.jpg


The main objective of the World Buddhist Fellowship is to link the various schools of Buddhism, coming as they do from all over the world.

This communion can be accomplished by harmonious cooperation on the basis of spiritual sharing.

As a global community we can then actualize the inspiring ideals of world enlightenment and salvation through the encouragement of our common Buddhist culture.


We must first acknowledge that the various schools of thought in Buddhism are indeed facets of the Triple Gem that is Buddhism.

There is no room for superficial and dogmatic claims that one school is true whereas others are not.

For instance the Mahayana schools should not be lightly dismissed as illegitimate, nor should the Sravakavana school conversely be despised as moribund.

Only when the study and practice of Buddhism is carried out in a friendly and accommodating atmosphere, with mutual trust and understanding, will coordination and cooperation be possible. With this attitude, the trash and trimmings now enshrouding Buddhism can be removed to reveal the essential splendour of the Triple Gem.

Thus Buddhism, which is well-adapted to this modern world, can be redeemed and developed for the purpose of the enlightenment and salvation of the world in its dire present need.

Buddhism stems from one point of origin and is highly adaptable under many circumstances.


For different races, time and environments, it seems to develop into entirely different shapes and forms. But a close study of its trends and modes of development, its adaptations to new environments whilst preserving the integral identity of its core, brings one to the realisation that the different forms of Buddhism are interrelated and that cooperation amongst them is entirely feasible.

Generally, each school has its own characteristics and shortcomings. Buddhists should honestly survey these various schools, exchanging the shortcomings in each for the strengths in others on the basis of equality, and for the sake of pursuing truth.

In so doing, the ultimate truth as experienced by the Buddha may be realized and his original intention, as embodied in his teaching, may be fully understood.

1-1280.jpg


When we trace the different schools of Buddhism in the world today, from their origins in India, we can see that the profile sprouting of sectarian Buddhism seems to have taken place as follows:


(1) The sacred texts embodying the Buddha-dharma developed over time.

The sutras and Vinaya Pitaka were the earliest to be compiled and circulated.

Round about the beginning of the first century A.D., the researchers of the Agama Sutra and those dedicated to Sravaka practice had compiled the Abhidharma, emphasising the existential aspect of Dependent Origination.

On the other hand, the Mahayana scriptures had been compiled by those who stressed the virtues of the Buddha and the practice of the Bodhisattva, emphasizing the aspect of emptiness as central to the attainment of real understanding of Dependent Origination.

By the third century A.D., Nagarjuna had composed his famous Sastras on the Madhyamika doctrine interpreting the Agama and Abhidharma on the basis of the Mahayana sutras of the Sunyata school.

At about the same time, Mahayana scriptures tending towards 'eternal-reality' idealism, such as the Srimaladeve-Simhanada Sutra and the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, had begun to be found, followed by sutras such as the Lankavatara Sutra.

Along with this development, the Asters and Yogacaryas of the Sravastivada school accepted the "mind-only" aspect of the Mahayana school.

They compiled a number of Sastras of the Yogacara Vijnanavada and eventually flourished as a great Mahayana school in their own right.


Then, at about the fifth century there was a further development of esoteric Yoga from the school of eternal-reality idealism.

If one tried to follow the course of development of Buddhism as outlined above, one would have no difficulty tracing the evolution of the vast diversity of scriptures and doctrines held sacred by the many schools.

000110602.jpg

(2) Doctrinally, Buddhism was just Buddhism at first and there was no sectarian difference.

It did not divide into the Sravakayana and Bodhisattvayana until about the beginning of the Christian era.

Then in the scriptures of the Bodhisattvayana we begin to see the division of Hinayana and Mahayana.


In the second and third centuries scriptures of eternal-reality idealism started to appear in the Bodhisattvayana.

In such Sutras were first seen the terms "noumenon, Sunya and Madhya"; and "Hina-, Maha- and Eka-yana." T

These scriptures of later date laid special emphasis on the achievement of Buddhahood, and were thus also classified as Buddhayana.

At the beginning of the fifth century, another 'yana', the Dharaniyana, sprung into existence from the noumenal school of Buddhism.

This school classified all Buddha Dharma into the Tripitaka, the Paramita Pitaka (including everything of the exoteric schools), and the Dharani Pitaka.


It also categorised the Dharma according to practice as: Catvri-satyani, Paramita, and greed-ingrained.

These classifications are indicative of the diversification and development of Buddhism and are consistent with the schematic three periods of historical development proposed by the late Venerable Tai Hsu.


The latter were as follows:

42a364.jpg


Chinese Buddhism - from which Japanese Buddhism derives is representative of the Buddhism of the second 500 years, i.e. it is founded mainly on Bodhisattvayana, which links the earlier Sravakayana and the later Buddhayana. It therefore effectively ties Buddhist history together.

As it plays such a pivotal role in the historical development of the Buddha-dharma, the Chinese Tripitaka deserves the special attention of all those concerned with the present development of world Buddhism. It is my humble opinion that only in the study of the Chinese Tripitaka can the contents of Buddhism be fully and totally understood. The Chinese Tripitaka offers the following:

(a) Agamas: All four Agamas belong to the Bhava division.

The Madhyamagama and Samyuktagama were translated from the texts of the Sravastivada school while the Dirghagama and Ekottaragama were translated from those of the Mahasamghika or Vibbajyavada schools.

Though admittedly it does not contain a complete set of the sutras of any single school, (the Pali Tripitaka does present a more complete set), a textual conglomeration of many schools does have its merits (The Tibetan Tripitaka contains no Agama at all).


(b) Vinayas: The Tibetan Tripitaka contains only the new rules of the Tamrasatiya sect, while the Chinese Vinaya contains all the following:


(i) The Mahasamghika Vinaya of the Mahasamghika school.


(ii) The five divisions of the Mahisasaka Vinaya, the four divisions of the Dharmagupta Vinaya, the pratimoksa of Mahadasyapiyah, and the Sudarsana Vinaya of Tamrasatiya. All these are rules of the Vibbajyavada school.


(iii) The old Sravastivada Vinaya and the new Mulasarvasti vadanikaya Vinaya, both of the Sarvastivada school.


(iv) The Twenty-Two-Points-Of-Elucidation Sastras of the Sammatiya sect of the Vatsiputriyas school.

This rich collection of materials from different sources greatly facilitates comparative studies of sectarian Buddhism.

4155433.jpg

(c) Abhidharmas: This body of scripture is common to the three main schools of Theravada Buddhism, namely, the Vibhajyavadins, the Sarvastivadins, and the Vatsiputriyas. In the Tibetan Tripitaka there are only the Prajnapti of the Jnanaaprasthanasatpadabhidharma and the later Abhidarmakosa.


The Pali Tripitaka contains seven Sastras. While the Chinese Tripitaka has an especially large collection of the work of the Sarvastivada school, it also possesses the Abhidharma work of practically all sects. The Chinese Tripitaka contains:

i) The Samgitiparyaya, the Dharmaskandha, the Prajnapti, the Vijnanakaya, the Dhatukaya, the Prakaranapada, the Jnanaprasthana, the Mahavibhasa, the Abhidharma-hrdaya-vyakhya, the Abhiraharmananyanyanusara and the Abhidharmasamayapradipika Sastras of the Sarvastivada school.
ii) Of the works of Vibhajyavadins, it includes the Abhidharma Sastra of Sariputa, which is the only important work that links up the Southern and Northern Abhidharmas.
iii) It also contains the Vimmuttimagga which is a different version of the Pali Visuddhimagga.
iv) It further contains the Sammitiya Sastra of the Vatsiputriya School.
v) The renowned Abhidharmakosa of the third to fourth century which combines the best teachings of the Sarvastivada and Sautrantika schools, and the Satyasiddi Sastra of Harivarman which greatly influenced Chinese Buddhism.

All these treasures of the Abhidharma may be found in the Chinese Tripitaka.

It can thus be seen that although the works of earlier dates in the Tripitaka were not given the full respect due them by the majority of Chinese Buddhists, the wealth of information they contain will be of great reference value to anyone interested in tracing the divisions of the Sravaka schools and the development of the Bodhisattva ideal from the Sravakayana.

If these scriptures are ignored, I will say that it would definitely not be possible for anyone to fulfil the responsibility of coordinating and linking the many branches of world Buddhism.


(d) Mahayana scriptures of the Sunyavada.

72p.jpg

(e) Mahayana scriptures of the noumenon school, or the school of eternal-reality, are very complete in the Chinese Tripitaka.

These scriptures are very similar to those found in the Tibetan Tripitaka.

The four great Sutras, the Prajnaparamita, the Avatamsaka, the Mahasamghata, and the Mahaparinirvana (to which may be added the Maharatnakuta Sutra, making five great sutras), are all tremendously voluminous works.

Here it may be pointed out that the Chinese scriptures are particularly notable for the following characteristics:

(i) The different translations of the same Sutra have been safely preserved in the Chinese Tripitaka in their respective original versions without their being constantly revised according to later translations, as was the case with Tibetan scriptures.

From a study of the Chinese translations we can thus trace the changes in content which the majority of scriptures have undergone over time and reflect upon the changes in the original Indian texts at different points in time. Thus we have the benefit of more than one version for reference, recording the evolution of the scriptures.


(ii) The Chinese Mahayana scriptures that were translated before the Tsin Dynasties (beginning 265 C.E.) are particularly related to the Buddhism of Chinese Turkestan with its centre in the mountain areas of Kashmir.

These scriptures form a strong nucleus of Chinese Buddhist thinking. The translations of the Dasabhumika Sastra and Lankavatara Sutra all possess very special characteristics.


(f) Madhyamika: The Madhyamika texts of the Chinese Tripitaka are considerably different from the Tibetan renditions of the same system of thought.

The Chinese collection consists mostly of earlier works, particularly those of Nagarjuna, such as the Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra and the Dasabhumikavibhasa Sastra, which not only present Madhyamika philosophy of a very high order but also illustrate extensively the acts of a Bodhisattva.


78p.jpg

Of the late Madhyamika works, i.e. works produced by the disciples of Nagarjuna after the rise of the Yogacara system, only the Prajnapradipa Sastra of Bhavaviveka has been rendered into Chinese.

The Chinese Tripitaka does not contain works or as many schools of this system as the Tibetan Tripitaka.

The Mahayanavataraka Sastra of Saramati and the Madhyayata Sastra of Asanga clearly indicate the change of thinking from the Madhyamika to the Yogacara system.


(g) Yogacara-Vijnanavada: The Chinese Tripitaka contains a very complete collection of this system of thought.

It includes important scriptures such as the Dasabhumika, Mahayanasamparigraha Sastra, and Vijnaptimatrasiddhi Sastra.

While the Tibetan system was mainly founded on the teachings of Sthiramati which are more akin to the Mahayanasamparigraha school of Chinese work, the Chinese students of orthodox Vijnanavada follow the teachings of Dharmapala.


The Vinaptimatrasiddhi Sastra, which represents the consummation of the Dignaga-Dharmapala-Silabhadra school of thought, is a gem of the Chinese Tripitaka.

The Hetuvidya which is closely connected with Vijnanavada, is not fully translated in the Chinese Tripitaka and cannot compare favourably with the works of Dignaga and Dharmakirti collected in the Tibetan Tripitaka.


This seems to indicate that the Chinese people were not logically inclined, and gives no weight to engagements in verbal gymnastics and debates. In times past this had relegated the position of Sastra masters in China to one of relative unimportance.

(h) The esoteric Yoga: The Chinese Tripitaka includes Chinese translations of both the Vairocana Sutra of the practical division, and the Diamond Crown Sutra of the Yoga division of the Tantric school of Buddhism.

The only esoteric scriptures that are missing are those of the Supreme Yoga division which, as they arrived in China at a time of national chaos, did not have much chance to circulate widely.

Its very nature of achieving enlightenment through carnal expressions also made Tantrism unacceptable to the Chinese intellectuals.

However, the texts of esoteric Yoga are abundant in the Tibetan Tripitaka.

91063885.jpg

From the above it can be seen that the Chinese Tripitaka is composed mainly of Mahayana scriptures of the second 500 years, yet translations were not restricted to scriptures of this middle period.

The Chinese Tripitaka also possesses a wealth of works of early Buddhism as a good portion of the later productions.


Thus, if one could have a sufficient knowledge of the Chinese Tripitaka, and could extend his knowledge from there to include the Pali Tripitaka of the Sravakayana, and the Madhyamika and Supreme Yoga of the Tibetan system, then he would have little difficulty in gaining an accurate, complete and comprehensive panorama of the 1,700 years of development of Indian Buddhism, the record of which has been preserved in the three great extant schools of Buddhist thought.

9.11.12.jpg

The late Venerable Tai Hsu once said, "To mold a new, critical and comprehensive system, based on the Chinese Tripitaka, the Theravada teaching of Ceylon, and selected components of the Tibetan canon, should be the objective of the writing of a history of Indian Buddhism."

Even more so, it should be the objective of coordinating and connecting the many tributaries of world Buddhism.

It is our responsibility to discard the trimmings and to retain the very essence of the great Tripitakas, adapting Buddhism to the modern world so that it may fulfil its mission of leading the way, taking under its wings the miserable beings of the present era.

Translated by Mok Chung, edited by Mick Kiddle, proofread by Neng Rong. (20-6-1995)


Guide to Mahayana Sutras

Other Names
Notes
Shorter Amitabha Sutra.

Smaller Sukhavati-vyuha Sutra.
Sutra of Amida.

One of the three sutras that form the doctrinal basis of the Pureland School - the two others are Meditation Sutra and Longer Amitabha Sutra. It describes the Blessings and Virtues of Amitabha Buddha and his Pureland, and discusses rebirth.
Flower Ornament Sutra.

Flower Garland Sutra.
Flower Adornment Sutra. Gandavyuha Sutra.

Second longest sutra in the Mahayana Canon, (40 chapters). It consists of large important, independent sutras, namely: Gandavyuha Sutra, Dashabhumika Sutra, Amitayurdyhana Sutra. It records the higher teaching of the Buddha to Bodhisattvas and other high spiritual beings.
Brahma Net
Brahmajala Sutra. This contains the Ten Major Precepts of Mahayana followers, and the Bodhisattva Precepts.
Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra. One of the two most famous scriptures in the Prajnaparamita group of sutras (the other is the Heart Sutra). The Diamond Sutra sets forth the doctrines of Sunyata (emptiness) and Prajna (wisdom).
Prajnaparamita-Hrdaya Sutra. One of the smallest sutras, and with the Diamond Sutra, one of the most popular of the 40 sutras, in the vast Prajnaparamita literature. Its emphasis is on emptiness.
Heroic Gate
Surangama Sutra. Emphasises the power of Samadhi (meditation) and explains various methods of emptiness meditation. A key text of the Ch'an and Zen traditions.
Jewel Heap
Ratnakuta Sutra. One of the oldest sutras, which belongs to the Vaipulya group of 49 independent sutras.

Summary: The philosophy of the middle is developed, which later becomes the basis for the Madhyamaka teaching of Najarjuna. It contains sutras on transcendental wisdom (Prajnaparamita Sutra) and the Longer Amitabha Sutra.

A scriptural basis of the Yogacara and Zen Schools. It teaches subjective idealism based on the Buddha's enlightenment, and doctrines of emptiness and mind only.
Longer Amitabha
Larger Amitabha Sutra.

Longer Sukhavativyuha Sutra.
Sutra of Infinite Life.

One of the three core Pueland texts. It explains cause and effect, and describes the Pureland.
Saddharma Pundarika Sutra.

Lotus of the Good Law.

A major text, of which the Tendai (T'ien T'ai) use as a main scripture. It teaches the identification of the historical Buddha, with the Transcendental Buddha.
Amitayurdyhana Sutra. One of the three core texts of the Pureland school. It teaches meditation and visualisation.

Dasabhumika Sutra.

Sutra on the Ten Stages.

This sutra is the 26th chapter of Avatamsaka Sutra, and is also an independent sutra. It establishes the ten stages of cultivation that the Bodhisattva must traverse on the path to enlightenment.
This is a philosophic dramatic discourse, in which basic Mahayana principles are presented in the form of a conversation between famous Buddhist figures, and the householder, Vimalakirti.

Source

buddhist-essentials-and-concepts.blogspot.com.au