[Buddha-l] Pudgalavada - Vasumitra2b

[Dan Lusthaus]

Lance, Stephen, et al.

Looking over the difference between the Skt Diirgha-agama and the
Digha-nikaya passage re: the pudgalavadins, several thoughts occurred to me.

First, it makes one wish that some of the other Tripitakas of the other
Buddhist schools had survived. There may have been more interesting
variations.

I suspect that the version of this sutra in the Vatsiputriya canon -- and,
assuming the other pudgalavada schools shared the same canon without any
significant deviations, the Sammitiyas, etc.as well -- was closer to what we
find in the Pali than to this particular Skt recension. The Skt version
almost seems deliberately modified to neutralize pudgalavada readings and
appropriations: not only was prajnapti deleted (replaced by vyavahaara), but
the number of terms used to identify a "self," e.g., puru.sa, etc. are
increased, putting more stress on the rejection of "self" language, rather
than setting limits for the proper use of "self" language, as the pali (and
I assume the Vatsiputriya) version(s) expound.

Do any of you have a different take on this?

Dan Lusthaus