[Buddha-l] Are the Pali Sutta's really ancient?

[Zelders.YH]

Bankei wrote:

>Remember the suttas were not managed by a central authority. Small groups of
>banakas, or reciters, managed different pieces and may not have had access
>to the whole tipitaka. There are many interesting things in there - like the
>monk Purana who did not want to endorse the chanting of the first council.

Ah, Puraana !
A couple of years ago I played with the idea that 
he and his 500 followers possibly stood for some 
major schism in the sangha, right after the Buddha's demise.
I brought it up as a question on this list but never got a reaction.
A little later I stumbled upon an old 'Monist' 
article from 1904, on the internet, by young (not 
yet Daisetz) Teitaro Suzuki, who quotes from 
Chinese sources, from which one might conclude 
that the difference of opinion between 
Mahaakassapa and Puraana probably concerned some 
very minor vinaya rules : 
http://www.preterhuman.net/texts/religion.occult.new_age/www.sacred-texts.com/journals/mon/1stbudcn.htm 
.


The last alinea of the article ('Incident of 
Puraana') goes like this (original diacritics) :

"Three out of the eleven Chinese translations 
which contain accounts of the First Convocation 
refer to the episode of Purâ.na, who was in the 
south when Mahâkâçyapa and five hundred Bhikshus 
were working on the compilation of the Pitaka. 
According to the Caturvarga-vinaya, the event occurred in the following manner:

Having heard that the Convocation was taking 
place in Râjagriha, Sthavira Purâ.na hastened 
thither, accompanied by his party, which 
consisted of five hundred Bhikshus. He went to 
Mahâkâçyapa and asked if he also might be allowed 
to learn all that had happened. Mahâkâçyapa 
thereupon again summoned the assembly, requested 
Upâli to rehearse what he had recited, and had 
other things repeated as they had been done 
before. Purâ.na expressed his satisfaction with 
the general proceedings of the Convocation, 
except as to the insertion of the following eight 
indulgences, which had been plainly approved by 
Buddha, and unmistakably kept in memory by 
himself. The eight things were: (1) Keeping food 
indoors; (2) Cooking indoors; (3) Cooking of 
one's own accord; (4) Taking food of one's own 
accord; (5) Receiving food when rising early in 
the morning; (6) Carrying food home according to 
the wish of a giver; (7) Having miscellaneous 
fruits; (8) Eating things grown in (or by?) a pond.

These indulgences, said he, were not against the 
rule that forbids the taking of the remnant of 
food. Mahâkâçyapa told him that he was correct in 
saying so, but that Buddha permitted them only on 
account of a scarcity of food, when the Bhikshus 
could not get a sufficient supply of it by going 
their rounds, and that therefore when this 
circumstance was removed, Buddha again bade them 
to abstain from these eight indulgences. Purâ.na, 
however, protested, declaring that Buddha, who 
was all-wise, would not permit what otherwise was 
forbidden, nor would he forbid what otherwise was 
permitted. To this Mahâkâçyapa replied: "The very 
reason of his being all-wise has enabled him to 
permit what otherwise was forbidden, and to 
forbid what otherwise was permitted. Purâ.na, we 
will now make this decision: That whatever Buddha 
did not forbid shall not be forbidden, and 
whatever Buddha forbade shall not be disregarded. 
Let us train ourselves in accordance with the 
disciplinary rules established by Buddha."

The Pañcavarga-Vinaya mentions, instead of the 
eight above enumerated, seven indulgences which, 
however, may be taken for eight, according to how 
we punctuate the passage, though the text 
apparently states "these seven things." They are 
slightly different from those in the 
Caturvarga-vinaya, to-wit: (1) Keeping food 
indoors; (2) Cooking indoors; (3) Cooking of 
one's own accord; (4) Receiving food in 
compliance with the wish of another; (5) Taking 
fruit of one's own accord; (6) Receiving things 
coming out of a pond; (7) Eating fruit with its
seeds (or stone) removed, when received from one 
who is not a regular attendant in the Samgha.
According to the Vinaya-mâtrikâ Sûtra, the first 
of the eight indulgences is the keeping of food 
indoors, and the last is the eating of sundry 
grasses and roots (or roots of grass) growing by 
a pond, but the six intermediate ones are not mentioned."


Isn't it disappointing ?
Herman Zelders