[Buddha-l] Are the Pali Sutta's really ancient?

[Bruce Burrill]

>
>
>Even one word can have a huge effect on the interpretation of doctrine.
>See Wynne's book for some examples, and Norman's papers for some more.
>
>Bankei

The question, was it a deliberate conspiracy to alter the suttas to 
conform to a doctrinaire position. As I pointed out there is also a 
considerable amount of textual stuff within the sutta collection that 
does not correspond to the doctrinaire Theravada position, but no one 
thought to "heavily edit" it.

But if you are going to posit that the suttas were "heavily edited" - 
to use your words - why was the "anga" stuff left in as well as all 
the other stuff?