Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
5.64 Suttas a week for 44 years to compose Pali Canon
vinlyn
Colorado...for now Veteran
Interesting statement from another forum: "We once calculated that Buddha had to have uttered 5.64 Suttas a week for 44 years to have composed the Pali Canon. That is impossible. Much of it has to be later addition (12919 Suttas ÷ 44 ÷ 52 = 5.64 .. not possible). That still leaves the Abhidhamma."
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. What do you think?
0
Comments
I wonder how they determined it to be impossible.
Heh. Well, the point is a valid one, about the mountain of often picky sutras that the Buddha is supposed to have spewed to his disciples. But I don't think any scholar or student of eastern religions believes every sutra that begins "Such a heard the Buddha said" actually contains the words spoken by the man.
@Vinlyn
That's what ya git sniffin around fer trouble on other sites ya floozy.
While I don't expect many to care here, literalists elsewhere might have to stretch a bit to maintain the purity of their practice.
And I have to admit...there's a coupla folks over dere dat are quite know-it-alls. I just sit back and read there.
@vinlyn I've noticed that too. Most people don't talk like that here.
What's a sutta?
Just kidding.
Sounds a bit like "doctors recommend a daily dose of 3.75 suttas to maintain a healthy diet".
Maybe he had a sutta rolodex?
Thank goodness! There's no place like home. Click, click.
Imagine that.
Lao Tsu the 'old man' founder of Taoism may have been an amalgam, Bodhidharma and Padsambhavna may have been a mixture of teachers. Even William Tell and Robin Hood and Merlin may not have existed as depicted. Oh well . . .
Next we will hear the Tooth Fairy does not exist . . .
The words, the inner sentiment of sutra may have value. Personally I find many of them trite and prefer updated and applicable sutures to sew my wounds.
Others mull over sutras for added depth and a good chew. Updates, interpretations, comments and maybe 'additional wisdom sutras' (authentic Buddha help us!) exist and I welcome their applicability for those who count such study as part of their dharma practice.
The point is I think, that the value of dharma is finding a way, a path, a practice. If you feel the need for an authentic sauce, then your source will flavour your noodle.
(contains aprox. 89.5% guaranteed dharma nourishment)
I really wish you would expand on that. Seriously.
Why so serious?
Free form Jazz from my understanding is centered around a theme but not held by it. Personally I find pedantic form limiting. Artistic expression more attune with freedom.
I have a copy of the Koran in English and Arabic, the commentaries on each page by Al Ghazzali are to my mind of far greater depth and wisdom than the simplistic ranting of a sincere illiterate inspired or dictated to by Cod (PBUH) . . .
In a similar way I am unable to click or groove with sutras. No reason why I have to . . .
. . . and now back to the statisticians . . . :wave: .
The Abhidhamma is a commentary so we can leave that out of the equation.
So somebody calculated the Buddha did an average of nearly 6 suttas a week - well, let's say that's one a day with Sundays off.
And some of the suttas are quite short.
Which sounds perfectly feasible.
Next?
But seriously, we simply don't know whether stuff was added in later and what it was.
If there is stuff people don't like or feel is irrelevant to their practice, that's fine, just put it to one side.
You get those in all traditions.
That's less than one per day! I don't see why that would be declared impossible.
Maybe they think it's impossible that that number of suttas could've been orally memorized. Seems silly to argue about it unless there's some way to know it one way or the other.
Yes, it does seem a bit silly. Some people go to extraordinary lengths to explain away or reinterpret the stuff in the suttas they don't like the sound of, but why bother when it can just be put to one side?
@SpinyNorman Why bother indeed? It's an intellectual trap.
The time would be better spent on the cushion....and that includes me! :0
I don't know... A lot of suttas are the same teachings laid out differently so it doesn't seem that much of a stretch to figure he came up with between 5 or 6 a week. It isn't like he had to write them down... He just had to speak.
At the same time, I would imagine there are a few bogus ones in the mix but religion is powerful and so it should go without saying people will corrupt it for their gain.
If it doesn't seem to relate to the 4NTs or move the story forward I lay it to the side.
For now.
Same here.
I sat with Thrangu Rinpoche last weekend.
He's pushing 80 and had a stroke a while back, but still gave two 90 minute teachings a day for the weekend.
That puts 6 teaching a week within easy reach and Rinpoche isn't a young healthy man any more.
I would think the Buddha could do at least that much.
It's entirely possible that the suttas were embellished or added to over a period of time, but there is no reliable way to assess which material was added or changed, why, when and by whom.
It's also entirely possible that the Buddha taught rebirth as a metaphor ( the "skilful means" argument ) but again there is no way to prove it. It's all comes down to interpretation, assumption and world-view.
Hm, improbable, maybe, but certain not impossible. Essentially, five to six suttas a week means five to six teachings a week, not even one a day for the Buddha's teaching career. That doesn't seem like all that much to be honest. Thanissaro Bhikkhu gives at least one or two a day, a short morning talk and a longer one in the evening. So it's entierly possible, especially since many of the teachings in the Pali Canon could have been given on the same day, e.g., one to monks, one to a visiting lay-follower, and even one to a visitor from another sect, like the Jains. In addition, a number of suttas in the Pali Canon are quite similar, meaning they could essentially be duplicates, so the actual number may be lower. Nevertheless, I agree that there are likely numerous later additions, and would say that what we have today of the ones that aren't are probably edited paraphrases of what the Buddha actually taught rather than verbatim accounts.
How many suttas could you recite in 24 hours?
Are we going to have a competition?
One sutta every week day, with weekends off, with a large majority of the content and teachings being repetitive, from a man who needed to sleep only an hour a day.
that doesn't sound very hard to me, seems a rather silly argument to say it is "impossible".
Fascinating. Maybe one thing that happened is that some longer sutras got broken up into smaller ones, with the usual introductory formulas added, which in the overall count, created extra bulk. And 5/week isn't much. He could do that in a couple of days.
And some of his sutras were given to his assistant and disciple, Ananda (& others), more by way of conversation, off the cuff, as they were walking around, visiting communities. His mind was always with the Dharma, and it formed the basis of his daily conversations. So what was later recorded as a sutra or teaching was really just the result of conversations on the Dharma with this or that disciple.
Also bear in mind that he spent part of his time visiting sponsors (which involved travel) and fund-raising for his community. So he was away for days at a time, if not a week or two at a time, sometimes. He was one busy guy!
It's having your own mentat on call daily for 44 years to accurately record every teaching uttered, which I find.....remarkably.......lucky.
First off, I didn't say what was quoted. It was a quote by someone else. I just asked what people thought about it. I didn't take a position myself.
I think @how has actually gotten to the more important point.
@how, especially the first teachings such as the very first at deer park because they wouldn't know to start memorizing.
@Jeffrey
Perhaps everyone was just so much smarter back then, unlike now when I'd be hard pressed to find someone who could accurately memorize a long suttra after only hearing it one time.... and then recount it again accurately so many years after the fact.
I blame those video games that you like so much.
I somehow doubt that if a sutta was really important it would only be spoken once.
It was much more of an oral culture, back then. And I think some of the disciples were tasked with learning and memorizing the teachings. Kind of like the oral historian tradition in some indigenous societies. And after the Buddha's death, they held gatherings where they'd recite the teachings, and would help remind each other of the details. That may have gone on during his time, too, I don't know.
Still, it's quite a feat.
The Buddha was a remarkable, unique, effective focus and catalyst for enlightenment. Traditionally leaving many enlightened beings to orally record the words that they understood as being said. Did the historical Buddha say all of them? What is this? Celebrity dharma? :bowdown: . The Buddhas are still reciting . . .
Look, the dude didn't spend 40 years doing nothing but sitting on a cushion and preaching the Gospel of the Dharma. He traveled. He accepted invitations from wealthy and royalty. He accepted visitors who just wanted to touch his robe and gaze upon his face. He mitigated squabbles amoung his inner circle of Arahants. He spent time alone meditating. In other words, he had a life beyond lecturing people.
Some sutras are obvious cut-and-paste jobs, where the interesting and important bits from other sutras are assembled. One sutra is nothing but a series of lists, a study guide organized as to how many items are on the list (There are 5 types of defilement. What 5 types are those? goes in the chapter of "5"s, just before the chapter of all the "6" lists they could find). And anyone who says the Jataka tales of Buddha's past lives were dictated by the Buddha, where supposedly Buddha claimed he was once a sentient tree who observed something going on (with what eyes?) or a fox who could hold an intelligent conversation about the virtues of honesty? They're obviously morality tales like our Fairy Tales.
I suppose my point is that Buddha did not write, edit, and revise the collection of sutras that are supposed to be in his name. They're not a diary of what Buddha said and not in chronological or any sort of order. They're compiled, divided, combined, and edited over the centuries by the monks tasked with learning and teaching what they learned and believed. Different temples and schools of Buddhism had their own holy sutras they thought were the most important. It was messy and imperfect, like any other human endeavor. To me, that's what makes it fascinating and precious.
The oral tradition was already well established.
Sariputra is also credited with delivering quite a number of suttas.
There are a lot of suttas which are very similar in content.
(ONE): I have heard it said that The Dhammapada is a condensed and very much minutely-packaged composite of ALL the Buddha's teachings.
(TWO): You have all you need in the 4, the 8 and the 5. Everything else is just a verbose elaboration of these.
A more disturbing conclusion is people have too much time and not enough to do.
Currently, that is my problem, though I am working on a remedy....
.
Yeah, like whoever did the calculation in the OP
That's what I meant.:)
Slightly off topic, but it said on the radio a few days ago that researchers had published the results of an extensive survey into whether it was true that magpies are attracted to shiny objects. With all the problems facing humanity, what a waste of a research grant.
I take it the conclusion was 'yes, they are'....?
Apparently they're not, shiny objects scare them. I hope no magpies were psychologically damaged during the course of this research.
When you have an opinion, you hope people will agree with you.
It is just the ego.
Everyone has an opinion, so what if 10 people on this forum agree with you
and 5 disagree.
The ego grows when more people agree with your opinion.
Conversely, the ego shrinks when many people disagree with your opinion.
A small ego is conducive for spiritual development.
My opinion is the suttas are the best place to look for Buddha's teachings.
Since it is hard to know which are BUddha's words, it would be prudent not
to dismiss any part that you dont like as 'later additions'.
Perhaps.
Personally I tend to focus on what I do like. No need to dismiss.
No need to dismiss.
I agree with you there.
Yes, I couldn't remember everyone's name, on the spur the moment. Hence the addition, "& others".
.
http://buddhism.about.com/od/becomingabuddhist/a/secularbuddhism.htm
This is a nicely written article by a Zen Buddhist about secular Buddhism.
( @vinlyn, did you mean to put your post in this thread, or the 'secular Buddhist organization' thread....?)
This thread, based on several of the comments.
But I'm not fussy.