[Buddha-l] Fw: BAU or Buddha's life ... which came first?

[L.S. Cousins]

Joanna,

I don't think anyone wants to take this on - it's just too difficult.

In short,
1. if the Majjhima discourses (or rather some of them) are something 
close to the actual words of the Buddha and you accept that they are 
critiquing certain of the earliest Upani.sads, then the oldest two or 
four Upani.sads are contemporary with or earlier than the Buddha.

2. If you think the Majjhima discourses (or the relevant passages in 
them), took something like their present form some time after the 
life of the `Buddha or you don't think they critique the Upani.sads, 
then the Upani.sads could have developed after the time of the Buddha.

3. The Upani.sads were originally dated on the basis of the dates of 
the Buddha and Mahaaviira. That would seem to imply that they should 
be later now that most Buddhologists accept a later date for the 
Buddha. I am not sure how far they can be dated on the internal 
evidence of brahmanical literature alone.

Lance

>Since our Buddhologers are so busy with pudgalavada,
>perhaps one among you might be sufficently energized
>to consider a reply to this query from another list,
>which interests me as well (on this list, and might
>interest a few others folks).
>
>Do y'all agree with Goto, Toshifumi?
>
>Thanks
>Joanna
>===========================