[Buddha-l] Age of the Sutta Nipata

[L.S. Cousins]

Those interested in the age of the Suttanipaata might like to look at 
the fifth chapter of Alexander Wynne's new book:
Wynne, Alexander, _The origin of Buddhist meditation_, Routledge, London, 2007.

He re-presents the arguments for the earliness of Sn and offers a 
strong critique of some of Vetter's positions.

Lance Cousins

>Gang,
>
>Thanks to Piya, Richard, and especially Lance for their responses 
>regarding the age of the Suttanipaata. I'm struck by Lance's 
>contention that arguments on the earliness of texts tend to be 
>circular or suffer from petitio principii. Very convenient to be a 
>translator as well as a commentator in such a matter. One can then 
>point to the authority of the apt text so much more easily when 
>supporting one's conclusions/assumptions!
>
>In the end, as Lance says, "views are likely to differ on this." How 
>delightful that I can go on thinking of both the Suttanipaata and 
>parts of the Majjhimanikaaya as "early/authoritative" simply because 
>I like them.
>
>(I'm hopeful and naive enough to think I would *not* do this in my 
>own subfields of Buddhist practice in America and the depth 
>psychology of Buddhism. Indeed, in those fields, what I *like* I'm 
>especially *suspicious* of. But I will allow myself a little luxury 
>of attachment in early Pali literature.)
>
>Franz