[Buddha-l] Pudgalavada #2

[Stephen Hodge]

L.S. Cousins wrote:

The question that is still not clear to me is whether we are dealing
with two translations of the same text, as Chau seems to suggest. Or,
two different texts from different Pudgalavaadin schools and quite
possibly in different languages.
----
No, I can't see how one could say that they are two translations of the same 
text in a conventional sense.   If one looks at the translations in Chau, 
that should be fairly obvious.  But there is some relationship between 
them -- T1505 seems to have drawn elements from T1506 or a common ancestor, 
re-arranged them and provided its own comments.  But the structure of the 
two texts is very different.  So I would say that they are two different but 
related texts.  They do not necessarily have to have belonged to different 
Pudgalavaadin schools, but the possibility that Prakrit was involved is 
appealing.


> If the last, then one might suspect that T1505 was in some form
> of Prakrit where Ku"saraajaa or similar is possible and T1506 in
> Sanskrit with the (possibly later) form Ku"sendra.
Possibly, but T1506 seems to be the older text, since T1505, as mentioned 
above, seems to use material from it.

Best wishes,
Stephen Hodge