[Buddha-l] Age of the Sutta Nipata

[Piya Tan]

Buddha-Lites,

One of the fascinating things about Buddhology and related fields is that
there are puzzles to be
solved, but unlike jigzaw puzzles there is no one way to solve them, there
is no picture to complete
even. Perhaps there has never been any picture at all.

Then again perhaps the picture IS already complete. There is the mountain,
and we can view it from
many angles and talk about it in different ways. We can sing songs, write
music, tell stories about mountains, and they are simply beautiful and
fascinating.

I like to see Buddhology, or more simply for me as Buddha Dharma, as
climbing the mountain, camping
near a waterfall, enjoying the fresh air, and the peace. and seeing myself
in that mossy rocks, the
massive crags, the misty trees, shy inhabitants, and strange bugs. I see
myriad stars in the cloudless
moonless sky. My life is complete and connected.

Understandably, the early Buddhists were very much a nature people. Borders
amongst religions were
also less obvious then. It was more a matter of the less happy learning from
the happier, the moving
learning to be still. Perhaps we are heading towards that age.

Meantime:
Perhaps a combination of the two--Buddhology and Buddha Dharma--would be
such a workable plan after all. (I happily recall "Buddhist Theology",
2000.)

Malaysia celebrated Vesak in the early May, and Singapore in late May, this
year. So we have a double
Vesak feeling here.

Happy Buddha Day, Buddha-Lites.

Piya Tan

On 5/15/07, Franz Metcalf <franzmetcalf at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Gang,
>
> Thanks to Piya, Richard, and especially Lance for their responses
> regarding the age of the Suttanipaata. I'm struck by Lance's contention
> that arguments on the earliness of texts tend to be circular or suffer
> from petitio principii. Very convenient to be a translator as well as a
> commentator in such a matter. One can then point to the authority of
> the apt text so much more easily when supporting one's
> conclusions/assumptions!
>
> In the end, as Lance says, "views are likely to differ on this." How
> delightful that I can go on thinking of both the Suttanipaata and parts
> of the Majjhimanikaaya as "early/authoritative" simply because I like
> them.
>
> (I'm hopeful and naive enough to think I would *not* do this in my own
> subfields of Buddhist practice in America and the depth psychology of
> Buddhism. Indeed, in those fields, what I *like* I'm especially
> *suspicious* of. But I will allow myself a little luxury of attachment
> in early Pali literature.)
>
> Franz
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/private/buddha-l/attachments/20070515/3bcf303b/attachment.html