--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Gunnar Gällmo <gunnargallmo@...> wrote:

> > Actually, we don't know if the ancient Buddhist
> masters are correctly cited or not; and it isn't very
> important. What's important is whether our study of
> these texts help our practice and our liberation or
> not.
>
>+++++++++

Dear Gunnar,
Talk to a Hare Khrisna or
Transcendendal meditator or Mormon, or probably even Osama bin laden
and all will claim that they have read their texts followed their
system and it has
lead them to great insights and peace. Often the longer they have
been following it the more convinced they are of how liberated they
are.

Thus it seems reasoanbly important if one wants to follow the Buddha
that the texts one relies on are right. If one values a fake text
and follows that you could still feel you were getting much out of
it, while all the time heading along the wrong path.

Someone has suggested that part of the Tipitaka was added by later
monks. Now these monks must have plotted together and convinced
literally hundreds of other monks to go along with them and make the
outright slander and lie that the Dhammasangani was part of the
Tipitaka so that it could be included in the Buddhist councils.
If the Dhammasangani (the First book of the Abhidhamma) is not a
genuine Buddhist text then it should be held in contempt by devout
Buddhists.
So far no one has produced evidence of this plot or the names of
the leaders.
RobertK

p.s.If we decide that some parts of the Tipitaka are wrong and
others are
right is it wisdom that decides or is it "us" i.e. wrong view.