Historical Criticism of a Buddhist Scripture: "The Mahāparinibbāna Sutta"

American Academy of Religion

Historical Criticism of a Buddhist Scripture: "The Mahāparinibbāna Sutta"Author(s): Raymond B. WilliamsSource: Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Jun., 1970), pp. 156-167Published by: Oxford University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1461172 .

Accessed: 18/06/2014 08:49

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Oxford University Press and American Academy of Religion are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to Journal of the American Academy of Religion.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.162 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:49:19 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1461172?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Historical Criticism of a Buddhist Scripture: The Mahaparinibbina Sutta

RAYMOND B. WILLIAMS

HE codifying of the central tradition in a sacred text has been a

significant phenomenon in the history of religions. The major religious traditions are religions of a Book; each has its sacred written text.

Vedas, Torah, Gospels, Qur'in, and Tipitaka come to us in written form as the result of this codifying and canonizing activity.

Each of these traditions has an interesting history of oral tradition. Each was transmitted orally before it was codified, and in some instances oral tradition continued to influence the shape of the tradition even after it was written down. This oral tradition is important to pious tradition and, for different reasons, to modern historical critics. Oral transmission of the words is often thought to have authenticity and power which the written text lacks. The Vedas are still memorized and transmitted by Indian holy men who are ignorant of the meaning of the Sanskrit words. Papias is re-

ported to have said concerning the traditions of the life of Jesus that he pre- ferred the living word of the oral tradition to the dead letter of the written text. Buddhist monks recite some of the sutras on special holidays. Pious traditions develop which affirm the reliability of the oral form of the sacred text. The Qur'an is considered to coincide with the eternal Qur'in in heaven which Muhammad spoke and his companions repeated. The Tipitaka is represented as the accurate recollection of the disciples of the Buddha at the first council, called to preserve his teachings.

Modern critics are generally skeptical of these pious traditions but at the same time very concerned with the period of oral transmission. The central traditions of these communities were formed and codified in the period of oral transmission. Even after portions of the tradition were written down, the oral tradition which existed beside the written continued to exert its influence. Hence, a critical literary study of sacred texts is incomplete unless it is accompanied by a study of the form, codification and transmission of the tradition in the oral period. The major method for such a study is form critical.

Despite the experience gained in the study of German sagas, Hebrew Law and Prophets and Christian Gospels, there are no universal forms or specific

RAYMOND B. WILLIAMS, Ph.D. (Univ. of Chicago), is Associate Professor of Religion, Wabash College.

156



HISTORICAL CRITICISM OF A BUDDHIST SCRIPTURE 157

methods that can be applied to all sacred traditions. Each tradition created its own forms for the transmission of material. The basic approach of a form critic to a new tradition, such as the Buddhist Tipitaka, must be to trace the tradition back to its original units of oral tradition and then to see how these might be organized to reflect more accurately the history of the tradition and the development of doctrine in the earliest period of the religious community, the period of oral transmission.

An ancient Buddhist tradition gives a detailed account of the codification and canonization of the Tipitaka. The first Buddhist council, called for the purpose of fixing orally the text of the sacred canon, is said to have been held at Rajagaha during the period of the rainy season following the death of the Buddha. Maha-Kassapa presided and five hundred members of the Sangha recited the words of the Teacher. Upali was the chief authority in the recitation of the rules (Vinaya), and Ananda led during the recitation of the teaching (Dhamma) contained in the suttas (sutras). Each article of the Vinaya and each sutta was given an introduction describing the place, circumstance, persons involved, and the subject of the rule or discourse. This record includes no tradition of a written text; the material continued to be transmitted orally.

At the second council, held a hundred years later at Vaisali, the Vinaya was again recited and ten errors of discipline were condemned. According to the Ceylonese school, the third council was held at the time of Asoka, about 247 B. c. It was during this later period that the Abhidhamma came into existence as a systematization and development of the doctrines of the suttas along sectarian lines.

Regarding the life and teachings of the Buddha, the accuracy and authenticity of this oral tradition as transmitted by the Sangha is vehemently defended by many Buddhists. The Dipavamsa and the Mahdvamsa report that this carefully preserved oral canon was carried to Ceylon by Mahinda in the middle of the third century B. C. when he converted the island to the Buddhist faith. It was handed down orally from generation to generation together with the Atthakatha (Commentaries) which were written down in the first century A. D. In the first half of the fifth century Buddhaghosa arrived on the island from northern India and translated the commentaries into Pali. Supposedly the Tipitaka was committed to writing during this time and is preserved in its Pali form along with the commentaries.

It is clear, however, that the transmission and codifying of the canonical material was far more complex than this ancient tradition records. Indeed, questions of the historicity and nature of the first council have been keenly debated among scholars for over a century and a half. Oldenburg calls it pure fiction. The consensus, though certainly not the assured results of scholarship, is that the disciples may have met shortly after the Buddha's death and may have recounted some traditions from his life, but it is unlikely that the meeting had any of the formal structure or results which tradition attributes to it. E. Lamotte says that if some of the canonical texts were recited at the



158 RAYMOND B. WILLIAMS

first council, they were certainly not identical to those which we now possess., It is much more likely that the council at Vaisali collected the Vinaya as the guide for orthodox conduct in the Sangha.

The Tipitaka was not the earliest form in which the primitive oral tradition was transmitted. In the course of transmission there developed a number of literary styles and forms, usually referred to as the nine angas of the Buddha's discourses. Buddhaghosa, the translator of the commentaries, takes the angas as classificatory labels for the contents of the canon. The labels are: (1) sutta - a legend laying down a rule or a doctrine, (2) geyya - a sacred ballad or a tale in verse meant to be sung, (3) veyyakarana--an exposition, (4) gdthd - a poetical saying, (5) uddna - a hymn, (6) itivuttaka - "thus said the Lord," (7) jttaka

- a story of previous births, (8) abhutadhamma - a marvel or miracle, and (9) vedalla - probably, catechism.2 This is a mixed classification, some according to form, e. g., geyya, and some according to content, e. g., jitaka and abhutadhamma. Probably some early collections were made and preserved according to this scheme. However, it is difficult to identify or reorganize the material in the present canon according to these divisions.

Ancient commentators translated by Buddhaghosa also give evidence that even after the canon became fixed in the Tipitaka form, materials were added by the Sangha. They refer to the fact that some portions of the text were added later on the authority of some respected monk. The fact that this precision remained in the tradition indicates the seriousness with which the canon was preserved after it had been codified. It also indicates that it was not impossible for additional oral materials to be incorporated in the canon after it had been codified.

It is necessary, then, to reconstruct a picture of the process of formation and codification of the oral tradition which has become the Buddhist Tipitaka. Historical and form criticism of the Buddhist canon is so new and the material so vast that only a few general statements can be made.

The Buddha did not leave any written documents, but the authority of the scriptures is derived from him. We have no reason to doubt that some of the teachings of the Buddha were memorized by his disciples. Especially after the Buddha had gained a following organized in the Sangha there would have been the means and the purpose for preserving his teaching. The Sangha was regulated by his rule. There must have been many discourses known by heart to the disciples, and they may have been collected and recited in a sangiti or "chanting together" even during the Buddha's lifetime. It may be as W. Rahula suggests that the Buddha taught in a form with synonyms and repetitions so that the teaching could be easily learned by his disciples.3

1 Etienne Lamotte, Histoire du Bouddhisme Indien: des origines

a' l're Saka, Louvain:

Institut Orientaliste, 1958, p. 141. 2Sukumar Dutt, The Buddha and Five After-centuries, London: Luzac & Company, p. 89. 3 Walpola Rahula, What the Buddha Taught, Bedford: Fraser, 1959 and New York:

Grove Press, 1962, p. xii.




After the death of the Buddha this collection and recitation must have become more important. As in other oral traditions, this process affected the form of the tradition. In oral transmission mnemonic conveniences play a large part. All sorts of aids to memory - set words, fixed phrases, familiar conventional descriptions in stereotyped terms and other memoria technica - become characteristic of the tradition.

These materials were organized into loose collections according to form or content. The angas mentioned in the commentaries refer to these loose collections of material. There is the suggestion that any teaching would have to conform to one of these forms to be considered as Buddha's teachings. There may have been different collections of this material in the various Sanghas. This possibility may explain why the same episode is recorded in two or more sections of the Pali canon.

Thus the earliest division of the Buddha's teaching was not according to the canonical scheme of Vinaya (rules) and Suttas (discourses), but probably, of the present materials, the Vinaya or the Pratimoksa took shape first. The monks, the transmitters of the tradition, were of necessity interested in the rules and way of life in the Sangha. The Vinaya probably contains the earliest collections of the canonical material.

During this period there was much interpolation and redaction of the material in these collections. Professor Dutt suggests that the crucial phase of the transmission was a process which he describes as "monkish legend- making."4 He connects this with the rise of the Buddha-cult in which stories were turned into holy legends, miracles, concrete illustrations of doctrine and symbols of what the cult conceived as the true Buddha personality. Without doubt the tradition was influenced in this period by doctrinal developments, but there is no evidence of a transformation of the material in the formal way Dutt suggests..

It must be remembered that during this period and for centuries thereafter, the tradition was in oral form. The Sangha's reverence for the sacred word was a check on the tradition, but it remained very fluid. In the Mahdparinib- blana Sutta (Mahdparinirviina Siitra in Sanskrit - hereafter MP), various checks on the authenticity of elements of oral tradition are suggested (MP iv, 7-11). As late as the first century A. D. when the Questions of King Milinda was composed there existed numerous quotations attributed to the Buddha which are not to be found in the present canon. One may assume that these are fragments of the oral tradition which had canonical authority in the early period but which did not find their way into the written text.

Oral traditions were collected into units called suttas (a threading together). Some of these suttas may have been recited in early gatherings of the monks. However, none of the books of the Tipitaka can at present be traced back before the council of Asoka held in 247 B. c. although they undoubtedly contain much older material. In the Bhabru edict of Asoka

4Dutt, op. cit., p. 8.




seven passages which are identified with parts of the Suttapitaka are cited for study by the people. It is fairly certain that the canonical tradition, i. e., the basic organization of the materials of the Vinaya and Suttas, was estab- lished by the time of Asoka. The Abhidhamma reflects a later period. Within the canon there are strata of varying dates and signs of much addition and alteration. Possibly the tradition remained fluid in parts until it took final written form sometime between the second and fifth centuries A. D.

This account presents the history of the tradition as much more complex than the Ceylonese account suggests, but I have dealt with only the simplest formulation of the material - the Pali canon. Another major strand of the tradition is found in the Sanskrit text which has been preserved in similar Tibetan and Chinese recensions. During the period of formation and codifying of the material there was not one strand of tradition, but several. These various strands have been studied by Professors Takakusu and Anesaki who show that these traditions are similar to the Pali and go back to a common unwritten tradition, but they gradually diverged as different schools preserved and commented on them. Anesaki wrote, "The tradition preserved in the Chinese versions is neither a corrupted form of nor a later derivation from the Pali one, but the two branches of traditions are brothers or cousins."6

Thus, the historical critic of the Tipitaka must study each sutta in its various forms in an attempt to reconstruct the common unwritten tradition behind them. Then the individual units of the sutta must be studied as they were transmitted orally before their collection in the canon. This will entail a form-critical analysis of the material. Only thus will the history of the early tradition be discovered. As Govind Chandra Pande has written, "The stratification of the sutras thus appears a sine qua non of future progress in the direction of discovering ancient Buddhism."6

An an example of this method we turn to a study of the Mahaparinibbana Sutta. This sutta forms a part of the Digha-Nikiya which is one of the divisions of the Sutta-pitaka, the discourses of the Buddha. The arrangement of the four nikdyas (igamas in Sanskrit) must have originated early, before sectarian differences became acute. The same principle of division is found in all schools: one collection of long suttas, one collection of medium length, one of groups of connected subjects, and a group organized according to a numerical scheme.

The Mahdparinibbana Sutta is an account of the last seven months of the life of the Buddha. It includes a large number of separate discourses inserted into a continuous narrative of the Buddha's travels. T. W. Rhys Davids once held that this sutta was one of the earliest in the Pali canon,' but subsequent

6 Quoted in Edward J. Thomas, Life of the Buddha as Legend and History, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Turner and Co. 3rd ed., 1949, p. 256.

6 Govind Chandra Pande, Studies in the Origins of Buddhism, Allahabad: Univ. of Allahabad, 1957, p. 17.

7 T. W. Rhys Davids, Buddhism, London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1925, p. 14.




study has shown that although it contains some very early material, it is not the earliest sutta. The present recension is "a conglomeration of legends, a great mosaic of varied materials - episodes, discourses, myths, inset abstracts of the cult and its doctrinal categories - all however within a single and consistent narrative framework."8

The MP is preserved in both Pali and Sanskrit texts and in Tibetan and Chinese versions. Professor Ernst Waldschmidt has made a detailed analysis and comparison of these texts.9 He has shown that there is some divergence in the texts, e. g., insertions and omissions of various units, elaboration of form and variation in order. These variations indicate that even after the codifying of the Pali and Sanskrit material the oral tradition remained fluid. Waldschmidt divided the material into four groups: passages that were identical in the majority of sources, episodes in the majority of sources but divergent, sections in only a small number of sources, and episodes recorded in only one version. He concluded that the first group represented the oldest tradition and the fourth group consists of later additions. These conclusions are based on the presuppositions of an old literary source criticism and are not adequate in dealing with the development of the oral tradition. However, his study has shown that in its present forms this sutta illustrates the result of the oral transmission of the material in different schools.

The theory was suggested by Louis Finot and supported by Lamottexo and Frauwallner" that this sutta was originally connected with an account of the first council. W. Pachow refers to a translation by Po Fa-tsu, A. D.

290-306, in which immediately after the account of the cremation of the Buddha's remains there is a statement that the monks desired to collect the teachings of the Master. There follows an account of a meeting in which Ananda leads in the collection of the four Agamas.12 It may be that an ancient narrative of the Buddha's last days, his death, the distribution cf relics and a council to collect his teachings has been cut in two: the first part placed in the Suttapitaka under the title of Mahdparinibbdna Sutta and the second part, an account of the council, was placed in the Vinayapitaka at the end of the Khandhaka.

Another suggestion concerning the original form of the sutta has been made by Professor Pande based on the work of Professor Winternitz. He argues that the suttas which have Maha prefixed to their titles have attained their present bulk either through successive additions or the elaboration of

8 Dutt, op. cit., p. 47. 9 Ernst Waldschmidt, Die Oberlieferung vom Lebensende des Buddha, 2 Tie., Gottingen,

Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1944, 1948. 10 Lamotte, op. cit., p. 193. 1 E. Frauwallner, "The Historical Data We Possess on the Person and the Doctrine

of the Buddha," East and West, VII (1957), 309-312. 12 W. Pachow, Comparative Study of the Pratimoksa, Santiniketan: Sino-Indian Cul-

tural Society, 1955, p. 19.




shorter originals.13 According to this theory there was an early account of the Parinibbina which in the course of time was enlarged to its present form. He suggests that the tendencies responsible for the elaboration of the "originally plain and personal narrative" of the last months of the Buddha were the desire to interpolate later doctrines so as to give them the appearance of greater authenticity and the revision of the older text in the light of the newer apotheosis of the Buddha.14 These elements were certainly present in the growth of the tradition.

However the tradition was later elaborated or divided, it is obvious that in the earliest tradition the various short units of the sutta were formed and transmitted independently. There was evidently a great store of episodes and dialogues in the oral tradition, some of which were included in two or more parts of the canon in different contexts. Rhys Davids has shown that two-thirds of the MP can be traced in other parts of the canon in which a paragraph or more is couched in identical or almost identical words. Of ninety-six pages of the Pali text only about thirty-two pages contain material unique to this sutta.15 This casts doubt on the reliability of the narrative framework of the sutta. For example, it excites distrust to find that the occurrences at Pataliputra and the meeting with Ambapali (MP i, 25-28; ii, 14, 19) are narrated at another place in quite different connections (Mahavagga, vi, 28 ff.). The order of the units in the various traditions resulted from the threading together of these units into continuous narratives or suttas, like pearls on a string. For the study of the history of the tradition one must trace so far as possible the history of these individual units of oral tradition.

Already in the MP concern is expressed for the accurate preservation of these units of oral tradition and the exclusion of spurious traditions. In the text the Buddha gives the four authorities on the basis of which one might judge a tradition to be his teaching: (1) it had been received directly from the Buddha himself, (2) it had been received from the Sangha, (3) it had been received from a group of elders, and (4) it had been received from a monk known to hold the faith as handed down by tradition. However, in each case the final test of authenticity was whether the tradition could be harmonized with the Vinaya and the Suttas (MP iv, 7-11). If this could be done, it was to be accepted as the word of the Buddha. This obviously reflects a stage when some felt it necessary to exercise a more formal control over the tradition to avoid misleading rules and false doctrine. It also reflects the fluidity of the oral tradition which opened the way for such "false" teachings.

13 Pande, op. cit., p. 96. He follows the work of Winternitz, Historie des Indischen Litterature, Vol. II.

14 Ibid., p. 101.

16 T. W. Rhys Davids, ed., Dialogues of the Buddha, trans. T. W. & C. A. F. Rhys Davids, 3rd ed., "Sacred Books of the Buddhists," Vol. III, London: Luzac & Company, 1951, Part II, p. 71.




In order to make some preliminary statements concerning the history of this oral tradition it is necessary to undertake a form-critical analysis of the text.

The present form of the sutta is that of a continuous narrative of the last seven months of the Buddha's life and the events immediately following his death. The framework on which the narrative rests is a travelogue of the Buddha's journey in the Ganges basin. Between each episode the Buddha suggests to his companion that they move to a new locale. The travel narrative is very stylized; a regular sequence of clauses recurs in the set descriptions of the Buddha's movements. The last clause specifies the particular grove or house where he stayed. Such phrases are inserted with due regularity even when they add nothing to the sense.16 A form in the tradition made it im- perative that each episode be exactly located with the appropriate formula.

The work of Waldschmidt and Rhys Davids has shown that this travelogue framework is a later construction imposed on the material. It is quite possible that some of the episodes took place in the locale which is named, but the travel narrative does not give an accurate account of the Buddha's last months. The various recensions of the MP differ in the order of the events. Some of the events are located in other areas and at different times from those suggested in the Pali tradition. The travelogue was merely the thread on which the various episodes from the oral tradition were strung.

There are several small collections of material in the sutta which were organized independent of and probably prior to the travel framework. Several collections are based on a numerical scheme. In the midst of the discussion of the war of the Vajjians the Buddha lists seven conditions of the welfare of a community (MP i, 6). There follow immediately four other lists of seven conditions of welfare (MP i, 7-10) and a concluding list which contains only six items (MP i, 11). While the content of the lists varies, the form is the same with identical introductory and concluding formulae. Later in the sutta there is a collection of material based on the repetition of eight items (MP iii, 13-32). There are eight causes of earthquakes, eight kinds of assemblies, eight positions of mastery over delusion, and eight stages of deliverance. In the listing of the eight positions of mastery over delusion the positions are explained identically except for the change of a very few key words. This was a valuable aid to memory and transmission. That there was a long tradition of collecting material according to numerical schemes is evidenced by the fact that one of the nikdyas, the Afzguttaranikaya, was built up on such a scheme.

I have already mentioned that very early summaries of the central teaching of the Buddha were collected around the story of the death of the Buddha. This may be one reason why so much of the material in the MP appears also in other parts of the canon. The criterion for collection of material was

16 Ibid., p. 96 note.




not always consistency. On at least one occasion two statements of the Buddha were preserved side by side because they treat the same subject, even though they directly contradict each other. In one long section the Buddha comments to Ananda on the pleasantness of the surroundings with the suggestion that if Ananda would ask him to remain in the world he would not have to give up his life in three months (MP iii, 34-37). However, in the very next passage it is said that the Buddha had no desire to change the fact of his death in three months (MP iii, 48).

Embedded in the sutta are several long narratives which are skillful collections of dialogues. An example of this excellent story telling is the narrative of the conversion of Subhadda (MP v, 23-30). In the narrative are several small units of teaching and a poem, but they are joined together in a continuous narrative which probably had an independent existence prior to the formation of the sutta. Buddhaghosa's commentaries report that the last six words of this story, which say that Subhadda was the last disciple converted by the Buddha, were added in the sangiti.17

Thus there is evidence of a wide variety of sub-sutta collections which came together in the oral transmission and were later added en mass to the sutta. However, the basic building blocks of the sutta were the small individual elements of tradition. Many of these can be isolated easily enough.

Many of these small units are highly stylized in a set pattern used many times. The best example of this is the summary of the teaching of the Buddha in a stereotyped paragraph introduced by the title "comprehensive religious talk." Such and such is upright conduct; such and such is earnest contemplation; such and such is intelligence. Great becomes the fruit, great the advantage of earnest contemplation when it is set around with upright conduct. Great becomes the fruit, great the advantage of the intellect when it is set round with earnest contemplation. The mind set round with intelligence is set quite free from the Intoxications, that is to say, from the Intoxication of Sensuality, from the Intoxication of Becoming, from the Intoxication of Delusion, from the Intoxication of Ignorance. (i, 12)

This paragraph is repeated in identical form eight times in the sutta, four times in one four page section. It is an easily memorized formula for the typical teaching of the Buddha.

A stock phrase was used for the effect of the teaching on the hearer who is "instructed, aroused, incited and gladdened by his words" (ii, 14, 18, 19). Conversion is expressed by the sentence, "May the Exalted One accept me as a disciple, as a true believer, from this day forth as long as life endures" (iv, 34). This is a stock phrase constituting the final answer of a hitherto unconverted man at the end of each dialogue by which the Buddha overcame opposition or expounded truth. This phrase may have developed from use in the cult as an initiation formula.

On other occasions shorthand summaries of the teaching of the Buddha

17 Ibid., p. 169 note 2.




are given. In one section a paragraph is repeated three times as an introduction for

the truths which, when I perceived, I made known to you, which when you have mastered it behooves you to practice, meditate upon and spread abroad in order that pure religion may last long and be perpetuated in order that it may continue to be for the good and happiness of the great multitudes, out of pity for the world, to the good and the gain and weal of gods and men (iii, 50).

Then these truths are summarized as

The four earnest meditations, The fourfold great struggle against evil, The four roads to saintship, The five moral powers, The five organs of spiritual sense, The seven kinds of wisdom, and The Aryan eightfold path (iii, 50).

These are obviously arranged for easy memorization and are only key phrases intended to bring to mind the major teachings of the Buddha.

Not only in the teaching material but also in the narratives, set forms recur. For example, several invitations to dinner issued to the Buddha have the same pattern. The invitation is issued in the same words, the Buddha's response of silence is an indication of his willingness, and the journey to the location is recorded in a set formula. The location and the participants change, but the form remains the same. When the tradition preserved an account of an invitation to the Buddha, there was one accepted form which the narrative took (cf., ii, 15-19 and iv, 14, 15). Thus, in both the teaching and the narrative monks created or digested the material into certain stock patterns and formulae which could be easily transmitted orally.

One of the forms to which Buddhaghosa refers in the early tradition is the gdthd or verse. There are several illustrations of the verse form in this sutta. Generally these follow and summarize in verse form the narrative of an event. At the end of the Buddha's encounter with Mara and his announce- ment that he would die in three months, a verse is placed in the Buddha's mouth even though there is a difference in person:

His sum of life the sage renounced, The cause of life immeasurable or small; With inward joy and calm, he broke, Like coat of mail, his life's own cause! (iii, 10)

One of the few miracle stories in this sutta is followed by a verse. The Buddha and some followers came to the Ganges at flood-stage. While the others are making rafts on which to cross, the Buddha miraculously crossed to the other side. Then follows the verse:

They who have crossed the ocean drear Making a solid path across the pools Whilst the vain world ties its basket rafts These are the wise, these are the saved indeed. (i, 34)




The verse can be interpreted on several levels. It may be a comment on the spiritual capabilities of various kinds of individuals, but the narrative attached to it gives a material interpretation and a concrete illustration.

Verse is generally a greater conserving medium and in oral tradition is likely to be more conservative than prose. One is tempted to conclude that the verse represents the oldest tradition and that it created the accompanying narrative. However, one must be cautioned by the fact that the commentaries translated by Buddhaghosa indicate that at least three of the verses which accompany the story of the death of the Buddha were added in the sangiti (iv, 20, 38, 41). For this reason Pande concludes that where prose and verse occur together it is impossible to say in general whether the one or the other is older. "In short," he wrote, "the verse-form is in itself of no stratographic significance."'s

All of this gives evidence of the shaping of the material for ease in oral transmission. The verse form, the numerical sequences, repetitions, stock phrases and paragraphs and formalized encounters were probably shaped by the monks in the transmission, though it is possible that the Buddha's teaching methods included repetition and stylized formulae to aid memorization.

This leads to the question of whether this historical criticism of the text has made possible the identification of the "authentic tradition." One must still conclude with Professor Franke that "it is given as yet to no mortal man to demonstrate that any one Buddhist sentence was spoken during the lifetime of the Founder."'19 Certainly the travelogue and narrative of the last seven months of the Buddha's life, the framework of the MP, is a construct of the tradition. Several non-formal criteria have been used in judgment of the authenticity of the individual units. Miracle stories are often considered to be later additions reflecting the growth of the Buddha-cult. On doctrinal grounds the Buddha's rejection of "the closed fist of the teacher" is suspect as just the sort of interpolation which an earnest Theravada monk would insert in order to discredit the claim of the Mahayanists to possess esoteric teaching from the Buddha. Some consider the prophecy concerning Pataliputra to be a later insertion reflecting the later growth and importance of that city.

Due to the present state of development of formal criteria it is difficult to make many specific judgments concerning the age or authenticity of the individual units. In general the details of the narratives are suspect. They reflect the shaping of the tradition to such a degree that they consist largely of stereotyped formulae. They suggest that this is the kind of thing the Buddha did rather than that he did this or that specific thing. Although much of the teaching given in the MP is in stereotyped form, it is likely that the teaching is a more accurate reflection of the oldest tradition than the narra-

18 Pande, op. cit., p. 50. 19 Franke, "The Buddhist Councils at Rajagaha and Vesaili," JPTS (1908), p. 26.




tive. The oral transmission of teaching is generally more conservative than that of narrative material.

However, the major purpose of the historical criticism of the Buddhist scriptures is not to arrive at the ipsissima verba of the Buddha even if that should be possible. Rather it is an attempt to trace the tradition in order to cast light on the earliest development of the doctrine, practice and divisions in the Buddhist community. At present too little work has been done on the oral tradition to allow any concrete conclusions in this matter. However, this work is indeed the sine qua non of future research in early Buddhism.

Professor Pande has written that "like the Gospels the Nikayas grew up in the dark and their history can only be recovered in the form of a series of conjectures to account for the facts which they exhibit."20 This paper is a series of such conjectures concerning the Mahdparinibb~na Sutta.

20 Pande, op. cit., p. 28.



Documents

Historical Criticism of a Buddhist Scripture: "The Mahāparinibbāna Sutta"