Dear Ruwan,

let me be very brief on this topic of interest. While I am not an
expert in this area, I hope to provide you some points from which you
can research further.

In general, people divide current (i.e. existing) Buddhist practices
into two major streams, Theravada and Mahayana. Some further divide it
into three major streams: Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana. And, of
course, the sutras, vinayas, and even abhidharmas and commentaries
under each stream form the theoretical base of support for the
practices each stream promote.

Historically, the Indian Mahayana movement was a rethink of the
Buddha's teachings and its practical values. Mahayana philosophy, in a
way, makes Buddhism more accommodating and accepting of a wide range
of devotional practices, formerly not favored by Buddhists. There is
very much more into this, but I shall stop here.

The teachings of the Buddha, as rehearsed and compiled by His assembly
of great disciples after His parinibbana (first councils), is the
historical account of His life and ministry. This is a fact accepted
by all Buddhist schools.

Asoka sent missionaries around the world to spread the Dhamma,
including sending his son (the monk Mahamahinda) to Sri Lanka. The
credits of the Pali canon in Sri Lanka, Thailand and Myanmar (also
Laos and Cambodia), is partially due to Asoka.

Unlike the Pali canon, the Chinese canon is formed outside India.
(This should not come as a surprise. Pali is an Indian language, but
Chinese is not.) It is a collection of texts which have been
translated into Chinese from foreign sources, mainly Sanskrit (or BHS,
Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit). In the Chinese canon, we may find sutras
identical in content to Pali suttas. These sutras, which form a subset
of the Chinese canon, is known as the Agama sutras to students,
researchers and scholars of early Buddhism. The four Agamas correspond
to the four Nikayas of the Pali canon.

The historical needs and formation of a Chinese canon (since Mahayana
schools each has its own set of nominal sutras and texts), and the
relations of the Chinese Agamas and Pali Nikayas, are both specialist
subjects on their very own. And, definitely, there are people (experts
as we call them) specialising and researching in these areas. ;-)

metta,
Yong Peng.

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, ruwanr2003 wrote:

My understanding was all Chinese Buddhist books were Mahayana. Are
there Chinese Theravada canon available? If so it was translated from
a Pali version of Sri Lanka or a version from India. If the Chinese
Theravada version was a translation from an earlier Indian version,
has someone done any research to compare the Sri Lankan version and
that one?