Difference between revisions of "Atthakavagga and Parayanavagga"
m (1 revision: Robo replace 16sept) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:Kuan yin23.jpg|thumb|250px|]] | [[File:Kuan yin23.jpg|thumb|250px|]] | ||
<poem> | <poem> | ||
| − | The Aṭṭhakavagga ([[Pali]], "Octet Chapter") and the Pārāyanavagga ([[Pali]], "Way to the Far Shore Chapter") are two small collections of suttas within the [[Pāli Canon]] of [[Theravada]] [[Buddhism]]. They are considered by modern scholars to be among the earliest existing Buddhist literature. The suttas themselves portray the Atthakavagga as some of The [[Buddha]]'s first sermons; the Udana depicts The [[Buddha]] asking a [[Monk]] to recite [[Dhamma]], and responding approvingly when he recites the Atthakavagga. | + | The [[Aṭṭhakavagga]] ([[Pali]], "Octet [[Chapter]]") and the [[Pārāyanavagga]] ([[Pali]], "[[Way to the Far Shore Chapter]]") are two small collections of [[suttas]] within the [[Pāli Canon]] of [[Theravada]] [[Buddhism]]. They are considered by {{Wiki|modern}} [[scholars]] to be among the earliest [[existing]] [[Buddhist literature]]. The [[suttas]] themselves portray the [[Atthakavagga]] as some of The [[Buddha]]'s first sermons; the [[Udana]] depicts The [[Buddha]] asking a [[Monk]] to recite [[Dhamma]], and responding approvingly when he recites the [[Atthakavagga]]. |
Dating parts of the [[Buddhist Canon]] | Dating parts of the [[Buddhist Canon]] | ||
| − | We do not have a great deal of [[Information]] about the earliest phases of Buddhist [[Thought]], the [[Form]] of the [[Religion]] predating its later codification in the established canons and practices of the [[Early Buddhist schools]] and the [[Mahāyāna]]. | + | We do not have a great deal of [[Information]] about the earliest phases of [[Buddhist]] [[Thought]], the [[Form]] of the [[Religion]] predating its later codification in the established canons and practices of the [[Early Buddhist schools]] and the [[Mahāyāna]]. |
| − | Some texts, however, have been identified by scholars as being earlier than others; for example, in the [[Sutta]] | + | Some texts, however, have been identified by [[scholars]] as being earlier than others; for example, in the [[Sutta Nipāta]], which is a branch of the [[Khuddhaka Nikāya]] of the [[Sutta Piṭaka]] in the [[Tipitaka]], there are two small collections of [[suttas]], the Aṭṭhakavagga and the Pārāyanavagga, which some [[scholars]] regard as being considerably earlier in composition than the bulk of the [[canon]], and as revealing an earlier [[Form]] of the [[Religion]]. They are regarded as earlier because of [[elements]] of [[Language]] and composition, their inclusion in very early commentaries, and also because some have seen them as expressing versions of certain [[Buddhist beliefs]] that are different from, and perhaps prior to, their later codified versions. In this [[Thinking]], the Pārāyanavagga is somewhat closer to the later [[tradition]] than the Aṭṭhakavagga. The [[Khaggavisānasutta]] ([[Rhinoceros Sutra]]), also in the [[Sutta Nipāta]], similarly seems to reveal an earlier mode of [[Buddhist monasticism]], which emphasized {{Wiki|individual}} wandering [[monastics]], more in keeping with the [[Indian]] [[sannyāsin]] [[tradition]]. |
| − | In 1994, a group of texts which are the earliest Indian manuscripts discovered were found in Gandhara (see | + | In 1994, a group of texts which are the earliest [[Indian]] manuscripts discovered were found in [[Gandhara]] (see [[Gandhāran Buddhist texts]]). These texts include a relatively complete version of the [[Rhinoceros Sutra]] and textual material from the [[Aṭṭhakavagga]] and [[Pārāyanavagga]]. |
| − | |||
| − | Speaking generally, the Aṭṭhakavagga and the Pārāyanavagga tend more strongly to emphasize the negative sides of asceticism (i.e., asceticism as a process of negating desire), and show a strong concern with regulating everyday bodily activities and sexual desires. According to some scholars (but not all, see below), they also place considerable emphasis on the rejection of all views, and are reluctant to put forward positions of their own regarding basic metaphysical issues. This has caused some commentators (Gomez 1976) to compare them to later [[Madhyamaka]] philosophy, which in its [[Prasaṅgika]] [[Form]] especially makes a method of rejecting others' views rather than proposing its own. | + | Interpretation as [[Wikipedia:Heterodoxy|heterodox]] |
| + | |||
| + | {{Wiki|Speaking}} generally, the [[Aṭṭhakavagga]] and the [[Pārāyanavagga]] tend more strongly to {{Wiki|emphasize}} the negative sides of [[asceticism]] (i.e., [[asceticism]] as a process of negating [[desire]]), and show a strong [[concern]] with regulating everyday [[bodily]] [[activities]] and {{Wiki|sexual}} [[desires]]. According to some [[scholars]] (but not all, see below), they also place considerable {{Wiki|emphasis}} on the rejection of all [[views]], and are reluctant to put forward positions of their own regarding basic [[metaphysical]] issues. This has [[caused]] some commentators (Gomez 1976) to compare them to later [[Madhyamaka]] [[philosophy]], which in its [[Prasaṅgika]] [[Form]] especially makes a method of rejecting others' [[views]] rather than proposing its own. | ||
Pre-Buddhist and/or proto-[[Madhyamaka]] | Pre-Buddhist and/or proto-[[Madhyamaka]] | ||
[[File:Ljytkihedbh.jpg|thumb|250px|]] | [[File:Ljytkihedbh.jpg|thumb|250px|]] | ||
| − | After Gomez had proposed these texts as a sort of proto-[[Madhyamaka]], a leading Dutch [[Pali]] scholar, Tillman Vetter, re-examined the evidence. Although agreeing overall with Gomez's observations, he suggests some refinements on historical and doctrinal grounds. First, he notes that neither of these short collections of suttas are homogeneous and hence are not all amenable to Gomez' proposals. According to Vetter, those suttas which do lend support to Gomez probably originated with a heterodox ascetic group that pre-dated The [[Buddha]], and were integrated into the Buddhist [[Sangha]] at an early date, bringing with them some suttas that were already in existence and also composing further suttas in which they tried to combine their own teachings with those of The [[Buddha]]. Thus if both Gomez and Vetter are correct, Prasangika [[Madhyamaka]] would represent a continuation of a heterodox strand within [[Buddhism]], rather than either a totally or largely orthodox one, as held by some scholars. | + | After Gomez had proposed these texts as a sort of proto-[[Madhyamaka]], a leading Dutch [[Pali]] [[scholar]], Tillman Vetter, re-examined the {{Wiki|evidence}}. Although agreeing overall with Gomez's observations, he suggests some refinements on historical and [[doctrinal]] grounds. First, he notes that neither of these short collections of [[suttas]] are homogeneous and hence are not all amenable to Gomez' proposals. According to Vetter, those [[suttas]] which do lend support to Gomez probably originated with a [[Wikipedia:Heterodoxy|heterodox]] [[ascetic]] group that pre-dated The [[Buddha]], and were integrated into the [[Buddhist]] [[Sangha]] at an early date, bringing with them some [[suttas]] that were already in [[existence]] and also composing further [[suttas]] in which they tried to combine their own teachings with those of The [[Buddha]]. Thus if both Gomez and Vetter are correct, [[Prasangika]] [[Madhyamaka]] would represent a continuation of a [[Wikipedia:Heterodoxy|heterodox]] strand within [[Buddhism]], rather than either a totally or largely {{Wiki|orthodox}} one, as held by some [[scholars]]. |
| − | Interpretation as orthodox | + | Interpretation as {{Wiki|orthodox}} |
| − | Paul Fuller has rejected the arguments of Gomez and Vetter. He finds that "the [[Nikayas]] and the Atthakavagga present the same cognitive attitude toward views, wrong or right." He states that in the [[Nikayas]], right-view includes non-dependence on [[Knowledge]] and views, and mentions The [[Buddha]]'s simile of his [[Dhamma]] as a raft that must be abandoned. He finds that the Atthakavagga's treatment of [[Knowledge]] and [[Wisdom]] is parallel to the later Patthana's apparent [[Criticism]] of giving, holding The [[Precepts]], the duty of observance, and practicing the jhanas. In his view, both texts exhibit this particular approach not as an attack practice or [[Knowledge]], but to point out that [[Attachment]] to the path is destructive. Similarly, the text's treatment of [[Concentration]] [[Meditation]] is intended to warn against [[Attachment]] to [[Insight]], and communicate that [[Insight]] into the nature of things necessarily involves a calm [[Mind]]. | + | Paul Fuller has rejected the arguments of Gomez and Vetter. He finds that "the [[Nikayas]] and the [[Atthakavagga]] {{Wiki|present}} the same [[Wikipedia:cognition|cognitive]] [[attitude]] toward [[views]], wrong or right." He states that in the [[Nikayas]], right-view includes non-dependence on [[Knowledge]] and [[views]], and mentions The [[Buddha]]'s simile of his [[Dhamma]] as a raft that must be abandoned. He finds that the [[Atthakavagga's]] treatment of [[Knowledge]] and [[Wisdom]] is parallel to the later [[Patthana's]] apparent [[Criticism]] of giving, holding The [[Precepts]], the [[duty]] of [[observance]], and practicing the [[jhanas]]. In his [[view]], both texts exhibit this particular approach not as an attack practice or [[Knowledge]], but to point out that [[Attachment]] to the [[path]] is {{Wiki|destructive}}. Similarly, the text's treatment of [[Concentration]] [[Meditation]] is intended to warn against [[Attachment]] to [[Insight]], and {{Wiki|communicate}} that [[Insight]] into the [[nature]] of things necessarily involves a [[calm]] [[Mind]]. |
| − | The Buddhist tradition has itself taken the view that the text's statements, including many which are clearly intended to be paradoxical, are meant to be puzzled over and explicated. An extended commentary attributed to [[Sariputta]], entitled the Mahaniddesa, was included in the Canon. It seeks to reconcile the content of the poems with the teachings in the rest of the discourses. | + | The [[Buddhist tradition]] has itself taken the [[view]] that the text's statements, including many which are clearly intended to be {{Wiki|paradoxical}}, are meant to be puzzled over and explicated. An extended commentary attributed to [[Sariputta]], entitled the [[Mahaniddesa]], was included in the [[Canon]]. It seeks to reconcile the content of the poems with the teachings in the rest of the [[discourses]]. |
| − | Alexander Wynne's recent work also rejects both of Vetter's claims that the Parayanavagga shows a chronological stratification and different attitude toward [[Mindfulness]] and liberating [[Insight]] than do other works. | + | Alexander Wynne's recent work also rejects both of Vetter's claims that the [[Parayanavagga]] shows a {{Wiki|chronological}} stratification and different [[attitude]] toward [[Mindfulness]] and liberating [[Insight]] than do other works. |
See also | See also | ||
[[File:Hibiscus Buddha.s.jpg|thumb|250px|]] | [[File:Hibiscus Buddha.s.jpg|thumb|250px|]] | ||
| Line 33: | Line 34: | ||
Notes | Notes | ||
| − | ^ In the [[Pali]] canon, these chapters are the fourth and fifth chapters of the [[Khuddaka Nikaya]]'s [[Sutta]] | + | ^ In the [[Pali]] [[canon]], these chapters are the fourth and fifth chapters of the [[Khuddaka Nikaya]]'s [[Sutta Nipata]], respectively. |
| − | ^ Gomez, Luis. "Proto- | + | ^ Gomez, Luis. "Proto-[[Madhyamika]] in the [[Pali canon]]" in [[Philosophy]] [[East]] and [[West]] 26:2 April 1976 pp. 137-165. |
| − | ^ See, for example, Saloman's A Gāndhārī Version of the Rhinoceros [[Sūtra]], pp. 15-16. | + | ^ See, for example, Saloman's A {{Wiki|Gāndhārī}} Version of the Rhinoceros [[Sūtra]], pp. 15-16. |
| − | ^ Grace G. Burford, Culaniddesa. In Karl H. Potter, ed., Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies: [[Abhidharma]] [[Buddhism]] to 150 A. D. Published by Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1996, page 316. | + | ^ Grace G. Burford, Culaniddesa. In Karl H. Potter, ed., {{Wiki|Encyclopedia}} of [[Indian]] [[philosophies]]: [[Abhidharma]] [[Buddhism]] to 150 A. D. Published by {{Wiki|Motilal Banarsidass}} Publ., 1996, page 316. |
| − | ^ Paul Fuller, The Notion of Diṭṭhi in [[Theravāda]] [[Buddhism]]: The Point of View. Routledge, 2005, page 151. | + | ^ Paul Fuller, The Notion of [[Diṭṭhi]] in [[Theravāda]] [[Buddhism]]: The Point of [[View]]. Routledge, 2005, page 151. |
| − | ^ Thanissaro [[Bhikkhu]], The Atthaka Vagga (The Octet Chapter): An Introduction. . | + | ^ [[Thanissaro]] [[Bhikkhu]], The [[Atthaka Vagga]] (The Octet [[Chapter]]): An Introduction. . |
| − | ^ Alexander Wynne, The Origin of Buddhist Mediation. Routledge 2007, page 75. Wynne devotes a chapter to the Parayanavagga. | + | ^ Alexander Wynne, The Origin of [[Buddhist]] [[Mediation]]. Routledge 2007, page 75. Wynne devotes a [[chapter]] to the [[Parayanavagga]]. |
Sources | Sources | ||
| − | Gomez, Luis O. "Proto-Mādhyamika in the [[Pāli Canon]]," pp. 137-165 in Philosophy East and West 26:2, 1976. | + | Gomez, Luis O. "Proto-Mādhyamika in the [[Pāli Canon]]," pp. 137-165 in [[Philosophy]] [[East]] and [[West]] 26:2, 1976. |
| − | Salomon, Richard (2000). A Gāndhārī Version of the Rhinoceros [[Sutra]]: British Library Kharoṣṭhi Fragment 5B. Univ. of Washington Press: Seattle and London. ISBN 0-295-98035-4. | + | Salomon, Richard (2000). A {{Wiki|Gāndhārī}} Version of the Rhinoceros [[Sutra]]: {{Wiki|British Library}} Kharoṣṭhi Fragment 5B. Univ. of {{Wiki|Washington}} Press: {{Wiki|Seattle}} and {{Wiki|London}}. ISBN 0-295-98035-4. |
| − | Vetter, Tillman (1988). "Mysticism in the Aṭṭhakavagga," pp. 101-106 in The Ideas and [[Meditative]] Practices of Early [[Buddhism]]. Leiden:Brill. ISBN 90-04-08959-4. | + | Vetter, Tillman (1988). "[[Mysticism]] in the Aṭṭhakavagga," pp. 101-106 in The [[Ideas]] and [[Meditative]] Practices of Early [[Buddhism]]. Leiden:Brill. ISBN 90-04-08959-4. |
| − | Fuller, Paul. The Notion of Diṭṭhi in [[Theravāda]] [[Buddhism]]: The Point of View. Routledge, 2005. | + | Fuller, Paul. The Notion of [[Diṭṭhi]] in [[Theravāda]] [[Buddhism]]: The Point of [[View]]. Routledge, 2005. |
</poem> | </poem> | ||
{{W}} | {{W}} | ||
[[Category:Buddhist Terms]] | [[Category:Buddhist Terms]] | ||
[[Category:Buddhist Texts]] | [[Category:Buddhist Texts]] | ||
Latest revision as of 16:34, 16 August 2014
The Aṭṭhakavagga (Pali, "Octet Chapter") and the Pārāyanavagga (Pali, "Way to the Far Shore Chapter") are two small collections of suttas within the Pāli Canon of Theravada Buddhism. They are considered by modern scholars to be among the earliest existing Buddhist literature. The suttas themselves portray the Atthakavagga as some of The Buddha's first sermons; the Udana depicts The Buddha asking a Monk to recite Dhamma, and responding approvingly when he recites the Atthakavagga.
Dating parts of the Buddhist Canon
We do not have a great deal of Information about the earliest phases of Buddhist Thought, the Form of the Religion predating its later codification in the established canons and practices of the Early Buddhist schools and the Mahāyāna.
Some texts, however, have been identified by scholars as being earlier than others; for example, in the Sutta Nipāta, which is a branch of the Khuddhaka Nikāya of the Sutta Piṭaka in the Tipitaka, there are two small collections of suttas, the Aṭṭhakavagga and the Pārāyanavagga, which some scholars regard as being considerably earlier in composition than the bulk of the canon, and as revealing an earlier Form of the Religion. They are regarded as earlier because of elements of Language and composition, their inclusion in very early commentaries, and also because some have seen them as expressing versions of certain Buddhist beliefs that are different from, and perhaps prior to, their later codified versions. In this Thinking, the Pārāyanavagga is somewhat closer to the later tradition than the Aṭṭhakavagga. The Khaggavisānasutta (Rhinoceros Sutra), also in the Sutta Nipāta, similarly seems to reveal an earlier mode of Buddhist monasticism, which emphasized individual wandering monastics, more in keeping with the Indian sannyāsin tradition.
In 1994, a group of texts which are the earliest Indian manuscripts discovered were found in Gandhara (see Gandhāran Buddhist texts). These texts include a relatively complete version of the Rhinoceros Sutra and textual material from the Aṭṭhakavagga and Pārāyanavagga.
Interpretation as heterodox
Speaking generally, the Aṭṭhakavagga and the Pārāyanavagga tend more strongly to emphasize the negative sides of asceticism (i.e., asceticism as a process of negating desire), and show a strong concern with regulating everyday bodily activities and sexual desires. According to some scholars (but not all, see below), they also place considerable emphasis on the rejection of all views, and are reluctant to put forward positions of their own regarding basic metaphysical issues. This has caused some commentators (Gomez 1976) to compare them to later Madhyamaka philosophy, which in its Prasaṅgika Form especially makes a method of rejecting others' views rather than proposing its own.
Pre-Buddhist and/or proto-Madhyamaka
After Gomez had proposed these texts as a sort of proto-Madhyamaka, a leading Dutch Pali scholar, Tillman Vetter, re-examined the evidence. Although agreeing overall with Gomez's observations, he suggests some refinements on historical and doctrinal grounds. First, he notes that neither of these short collections of suttas are homogeneous and hence are not all amenable to Gomez' proposals. According to Vetter, those suttas which do lend support to Gomez probably originated with a heterodox ascetic group that pre-dated The Buddha, and were integrated into the Buddhist Sangha at an early date, bringing with them some suttas that were already in existence and also composing further suttas in which they tried to combine their own teachings with those of The Buddha. Thus if both Gomez and Vetter are correct, Prasangika Madhyamaka would represent a continuation of a heterodox strand within Buddhism, rather than either a totally or largely orthodox one, as held by some scholars.
Interpretation as orthodox
Paul Fuller has rejected the arguments of Gomez and Vetter. He finds that "the Nikayas and the Atthakavagga present the same cognitive attitude toward views, wrong or right." He states that in the Nikayas, right-view includes non-dependence on Knowledge and views, and mentions The Buddha's simile of his Dhamma as a raft that must be abandoned. He finds that the Atthakavagga's treatment of Knowledge and Wisdom is parallel to the later Patthana's apparent Criticism of giving, holding The Precepts, the duty of observance, and practicing the jhanas. In his view, both texts exhibit this particular approach not as an attack practice or Knowledge, but to point out that Attachment to the path is destructive. Similarly, the text's treatment of Concentration Meditation is intended to warn against Attachment to Insight, and communicate that Insight into the nature of things necessarily involves a calm Mind.
The Buddhist tradition has itself taken the view that the text's statements, including many which are clearly intended to be paradoxical, are meant to be puzzled over and explicated. An extended commentary attributed to Sariputta, entitled the Mahaniddesa, was included in the Canon. It seeks to reconcile the content of the poems with the teachings in the rest of the discourses.
Alexander Wynne's recent work also rejects both of Vetter's claims that the Parayanavagga shows a chronological stratification and different attitude toward Mindfulness and liberating Insight than do other works.
See also
Buddhism
Early Buddhist schools
Madhyamaka
Nagarjuna
Timeline of Buddhism
Notes
^ In the Pali canon, these chapters are the fourth and fifth chapters of the Khuddaka Nikaya's Sutta Nipata, respectively.
^ Gomez, Luis. "Proto-Madhyamika in the Pali canon" in Philosophy East and West 26:2 April 1976 pp. 137-165.
^ See, for example, Saloman's A Gāndhārī Version of the Rhinoceros Sūtra, pp. 15-16.
^ Grace G. Burford, Culaniddesa. In Karl H. Potter, ed., Encyclopedia of Indian philosophies: Abhidharma Buddhism to 150 A. D. Published by Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1996, page 316.
^ Paul Fuller, The Notion of Diṭṭhi in Theravāda Buddhism: The Point of View. Routledge, 2005, page 151.
^ Thanissaro Bhikkhu, The Atthaka Vagga (The Octet Chapter): An Introduction. .
^ Alexander Wynne, The Origin of Buddhist Mediation. Routledge 2007, page 75. Wynne devotes a chapter to the Parayanavagga.
Sources
Gomez, Luis O. "Proto-Mādhyamika in the Pāli Canon," pp. 137-165 in Philosophy East and West 26:2, 1976.
Salomon, Richard (2000). A Gāndhārī Version of the Rhinoceros Sutra: British Library Kharoṣṭhi Fragment 5B. Univ. of Washington Press: Seattle and London. ISBN 0-295-98035-4.
Vetter, Tillman (1988). "Mysticism in the Aṭṭhakavagga," pp. 101-106 in The Ideas and Meditative Practices of Early Buddhism. Leiden:Brill. ISBN 90-04-08959-4.
Fuller, Paul. The Notion of Diṭṭhi in Theravāda Buddhism: The Point of View. Routledge, 2005.
