Dear Suan,

> Nich wrote:
> "surely one should seek out the most reliable parts of the canon as
> a basis for practice?"

Suan wrote:

> You ought to have writen as follows.
>
> "surely one should seek out what one find to be the most accessible
> and understandable parts of the canon as a basis for practice?"
>
> If you are not an Arahant, any act of judging which parts of the
> canon are reliable or not is merely speculative at best and
> meaningless at worst.
>
> The five hundred powerful Arahants headed by Mahaa Kassapa who
> organized the First Congress Recital (Pathama Sangiiti) accepted and
> preserved each and every part of the Pali Tipi.taka as reliable
> teachings of the Buddha and his Ariya Disciples.

But all of the questions I've raised in this thread are about the fact that
what we have now, and refer to as the Tipi.taka, has been selected by
Bhikkhus, Pali scholars and textual critics (not necessarily or likely to be
Arahants).

The texts we use have been compiled from the available evidence.

So shat we have now is not what was recited at the first congress but the
result of centuries of transmission through oral then written means with the
inevitable textual corruption this process brings about.

Unless you're claiming to have been there & written the whole thing down in
shorthand, those who you refer to you as indulging in speculative or
meaningless behaviour are the very people who have given you the Tipi.taka.
Without their judgement you would have no Tipi.taka at all!

What I was hoping for in raising the various issues I did were some replies
outlining the state of Pali textual criticism and how it would compare to
the advances made in Latin & Greek texts. More specifically how this might
guide one in Pali studies.

As this thread has now mutated into something quite different where I feel a
little flamed for doubting that a single syllable of the Tipi.taka might be
corrupted, interpolated, misplaced or not a direct transmission I'm going to
bow out by pointing out that the Tipi.taka is a conditioned dhamma and
according to the core teachings of Buddhism is anicca.

To quote Professor Gombrich:

"During centuries of transmission both oral and written they were inevitably
subject to corruption. And I think that anyone who reads the texts while
keeping this simple fact in mind rapidly becomes aware that plenty of
passages do indeed appear to be corrupt." (How Buddhism Began: The
Conditioned Genesis of the Early Teachings p10.)

Regards, nich

(If anyone wants to mail me privately on any of these issues:
puthujjano@...)