[Buddha-l] The Sabba Sutta, actually.

[Jayarava]

Can we keep this thread for discussion of the Sabba Sutta please.

Both David Kalupahana and Sue Hamilton cite the Sabba in a clinching role for their reading of early Buddhism. There have a few critiques of Kalupahana's Empiricism (which I now understand thanks to Montalvo). I can see no critique of Hamilton in the literature - and no appreciation either except for some book reviews. I'm wondering if anyone knows of scholarly responses to Hamilton's work especially her (2000) book Early Buddhism : a New Approach which might give some other perspectives. Personally I think Hamilton, though a dull writer, has really hit the nail on the head in terms of her approach to the Pali texts, and I'm quite sad that she seems to have dropped out of sight.

Glenn Wallis also cites the Sabba and I'm presuming that it's too early to expect much of a response from the academy. Are there any Pali scholars who have read his Basic Teachings (2007) and have an opinion on his approach generally (which seems to me to echo Hamilton) or more specifically on how he treats in the Sabba Sutta, both alone and in the context of commenting on the Tevijja Sutta, on which he also published a separate article this year in the journal Religion.

Thanks
Jayarava