Hello Kare


The Sanskrit version of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra (reconstructed by
Waldschmidt from fragments found in Chinese Turkestan and published
in 1950) belongs to the Sarvastivada school. It includes a version
of the Mahasudassana Sutta; this extends from 34.1-34.169 according
to Waldschmidt's numbering; in other words, in between the place
where Ananda questions why the Buddha wants to pass away in such an
indsignificant wattle-and-daub town like Kusinara, and the place
where the Buddha tells Upavana (Upamana in Skt) to move out of the
way so that Devas can see. I have an English translation of this
important text, done as a Uni thesis by Mark Allon; unfortunately he
is a bit reluctant to let it see wider distribution in its current
form, but i still hope that somehow the translation will see the
light of day.

Translations of this text also exist in Chinese and Tibetan (these
were used by Waldschmidt to help in the reconstruction). I am not
100% sure that these also include the Mahasudassana Sutta, although
it is likely. The Chinese in fact has several translations of the
Mahaparinirvana Sutra. Many of these are independent translations,
so their doctrinal affiliation is unsure. Please let me know if you
would like some more specific details as to references, etc., and
i'll see what i can do.

Waldschmidt was of the opinion that the Mahasudassana Sutta was
originally part of the Mahaparinirvana narrative, and was later
removed in the Pali version. This seems to be part of a theory that
was popular in the time among the scholars such as Frauwallner that
there was earlier a long narrative of the important events in the
Buddha's life that was later broken up. I don't think this theory is
accepted by many these days, so Waldschmidt's claim might be
questioned. In other words, we might consider it likely that the
Mahasudassana Sutta was originally a separate text (as in the Pali)
that was later included in the long narrative. However i have not
looked into the matter in detail.

in Dhamma

Bhante Sujato

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Kåre A. Lie" <alberlie@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I seem to remember having read somewhere that the
Mahasudassanasutta
> (Dighanikaya 17) in some Chinese translation of the Agamas is
included in
> the Mahaparinibbanasutta (Dighanikaya 16) instead of appearing as
a
> separate text.
>
> But I may be wrong.
>
> Does anyone know?
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Kåre A. Lie
> http://www.lienet.no/