the Diamond Sutra

conradcook

I have a print-out of the Diamond Sutra, and also a shorter outline in my notebook. I'm curious about this:

It looks to me like it's a number of shorter sutras run together. The mini-sutras tend to end with a discussion of the blessings, virtues and merit of upholding the sutra. That just seems like an ending to me.

Also, if you look at the topics that lead up to those passages, that I'm thinking might be endings, the topics within each mini-sutra seem to follow each other as the development of a thought process. But the topics from one mini-sutra to another jump around.

It's as if a number of monks took notes on a single speech of the Buddha's, and then comparing them found that they all had written down different things; so, instead of interleaving them and editing them into a reconstruction of the original talk, they put them together one after the other. And then at some point in copying the divisions between them were left out.

I say a single speech of the Buddha's because there is a great deal of repetition of topic from one mini-sutra to another.

The mini-sutras (if they really are mini-sutras) would be:

1-13
14-16
17-19
20-24
25-28 (maybe)
29-32 (could be part of the prior mini-sutra)

...I mean, I don't know: I'm not a textual scholar and anyway I'm working with something I printed from the internet. A far cry from being close to the original text. --What do you think?

Buddha bless,

Conrad.

Talisman

Ananda was there when the Buddha was instructing Subhuti. This retelling was his recollection of the instruction. Or not. Who knows. In my opinion, the topics all seem to be related. You can tell that it's a single author though, because of the consistent structure throughout.

conradcook

What are you calling consistent structure? -- I'm not arguing here; I'm asking what you're seeing.

If you read it through, the Buddha makes most (although not all) of his points in the first 16 numbered sections. I'm picking that a little arbitrarily. Subhuti asks what the sutra should be named; the Buddha tells him. Subhuti is moved to tears. The Buddha tells him what blessings and virtues it will bring.

Then, in number 17, it starts off with Subhuti asking the Buddha, if a good man or good woman is resolved on becoming clear-minded, how should they subdue their minds?

The Buddha does not reply, "God-DAMN it, Subhuti, I just TOLD you how to subdue your mind!" -- Not that the Buddha would say that, of course.

Instead the Buddha responds to Subhuti's apparent amnesia with (if we take the text literally) some seeming-amnesia of his own. And he gives Subhuti the exact same answer he gave him before, in almost exactly the same wording.

Soon, though, he veers off his prior track, onto a different topic than his earlier version spoke about. But then for a while he revisits a topic he already discussed thorougly; then he veers off again.

This is the kind of result we'd expect if several people wrote down their memories of the lecture, or dialog, after the fact, and then those versions were presented serially.

You also see that the Buddha asks many times if the Buddha can be seen by regarding his thirty-two physical perfections. Subhuti generally says no, and the Buddha says, correct, no. Sometimes the question is just about the Buddha's physical perfections, with no number given.

Sometimes the Buddha just supplies the answer, with very little interaction with Subhuti. Ok, so there's just a lot of repetition, right? But then there's this:

In numbered section 26, the Buddha asks Subhuti about whether he should be regarded in terms of his 32 physical perfections, and Subhuti says yes, absolutely. This is the wrong answer: the Buddha says, Subhuti, if the Buddha could be contemplated in terms of his 32 physical perfections, the Buddha would be a wheel-turning sage king. And then he recites a verse, saying don't do it that way.

What, did Subhuti forget? He got tired and slipped up, toward the end? Or did most of the monks who transcribed their notes misremember the exchange to ensure Subhuti didn't look bad, except one guy (perhaps -- who knows? -- Subhuti himself), who recorded it like it actually happened?

Anyway, that's the argument. I'm not sure it matters, but I found it interesting.

Buddha bless,

Conrad.

zombiegirl

there are many many more on this site that are far more knowledgeable than i on this topic, but for what it's worth, it was my understanding that sutras weren't written down until well after the buddha's passing, so naturally, there might be several different versions/memories combined into one. after all, repetition is the reason they've survived at all.

for example, i know every chapter of the lotus sutra has two versions, one following the other. one which reads like a book and another which reads like a poem, but they both say the same thing, more or less.

as far as "consistent structure" goes, i'm not sure that one can accurately tell that without comparing the text in its original language.

conradcook

Hey guys -- I've put my thoughts online, going so far as to offer a reconstructed text of the Sutra.

I'd like to know your thoughts!

Conrad.