You wrote:
<< If I understand correctly ,then, there are alternative sets of 'top
level' categories for dividing up the Buddhavacana.
The most common one is the threefold division into the three
Pi.takas. From the point of view of this division, it would not be
correct to include the Vinaya or Abhidhamma in the Khuddakanikaya for
the reason I mentioned early, that it would nest two pi.taka's inside
each other. So I was right so far.>>
Jim:
Yes, you were right.
you continued:
<<However, if you choose _another_ system, there are Five Nikaayas
which are the topmost categories. The first four are (presumably) the
Digha, Majjhima, Samyutta and Anguttara Nikayas, and the Fourth is
the 15-itemed collection referred to in the previous division as the
Khuddakanikaya together with both the Vinaya and the Abhidhamma. In
this system, a Nikaaya is a more encompassing category than a
pi.taka: the exact opposite state of affairs from the usual system.
Is this right? >>
Jim:
I don't see it as necessarily being the exact opposite. The difference
is that the Fifth Nikaaya in the fivefold system includes two
pi.takas.
<< Further, in that case the text quoted by Suan seems to need a
slight modification:
"khuddakapaa.thadhammapadaadayo" needs to be a single compound
meaning [beginning with the Khuddakapaa.tha and the Dhammapada]
Since these two named texts are the usual first two items in the list
of contents of the Khuddakanikaya it is natural for them to be in an
-adi construction like this to refer to the whole collection. Also,
if they are written separately, 'khuddakapaa.tha' is left without a
case ending. So I conclude the text as presented in Suan's post (and
presumably the edition he quotes from) is in error and needs this
amendment. >>
Jim:
I think Suan may have put in the comma after 'khuddakapaa.tha' for
more clarity. The PTS ed. p. 26 has a hyphen instead of a comma. The
parallel passage in the Vinaya commentary has only
'khuddakapaa.thaadayo'.
<< So would a translation be as follows? (Items in brackets are
supplied for clarity).
"What is the Khuddakanikaaya? The entire Vinaya-basket, the
Abhidhamma-basket, and the formerly shown fifteen-item [set of texts]
beginning with the Khuddakapaa.tha and the Dhammapada; having
established four nikaayas, the remaining Buddhavacana [is the
Khuddakanikaaya]."
Is this right? >>
Jim:
Yes, that looks okay to me with the exception of "having established"
(.thapetvaa) which should be "setting aside" or something like that.
<< I would say that I think it's a bit tricky of Suan to call the
Abhidhamma part of the Khuddakanikaaya since it seems to me that the
DEFAULT system of division, unless you specify otherwise, is the
3-fold pi.taka-based division. And in that system, Suan's statement
would be wrong. But that is not important since as I understood it,
the essential point he wanted to make is that the commentary
considers the Abhidhamma to be Buddhavacana. And that does seem to be
supported by this passage. >>
Jim:
It's unusual (even if correct) to make reference to the
Abhidhammapi.taka as being part of the Khuddakanikaaya and I think
most people who are unfamiliar with this particular fivefold scheme
described in the commentaries would immediately think that there must
be some mistake. As for the three-pi.taka scheme, I'm not aware of the
Buddha ever making mention of such in the Tipi.taka itself. The one
that he uses instead is the nine-limbed (navanga) one. In this scheme
the commentaries include the Abhidhammapi.taka in 'veyyaakara.na'.
On page 15 of the Sumangalavilaasinii it is stated that, at the First
Council, the seven books of the Abhidhammapi.taka were recited
immediately after the recital of the A"nguttaranikaaya, after which
came the recital of the familiar texts of the Khuddakanikaaya (in the
following order): jaataka.m, niddeso, pa.tisambhidaamaggo, apadaana.m,
suttanipaato, khuddakapaa.tho, dhammapada.m, udaana.m, itivuttaka.m,
vimaanavatthu, petavatthu, theragaathaa, & theriigaathaa, according to
the Diighabhaa.nakas and called the collection the Khuddakagantha
which they included in the Abhidhammapi.taka. Note that the
Buddhava.msa and Cariyaapi.taka are also included by the
Majjhimabhaa.nakas but they placed the whole Khuddakagantha in with
the Suttantapi.taka instead.