• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Gospel of Buddha

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I think "The Gospel of Buddha" is a good and concise collection of what Buddha said and did. Is there one better collection than it?
 

Gjallarhorn

N'yog-Sothep
Was it canonized by Buddha?
Is it in the original language Buddha spoke?
What is its authenticity?
No, probably, and depends on what you mean by authentic, but the Gospel of Buddha was certainly derived from its scriptures, so in any case, for one to be false the other would have to be as well.
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
I think "The Gospel of Buddha" is a good and concise collection of what Buddha said and did. Is there one better collection than it?
Was it canonized by Buddha?
Is it in the original language Buddha spoke?
What is its authenticity?


(Hint, the Gospel of Buddha was written in 1894 by a German/American and reflects western philosophy)
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Is the Pali Canon and the Sutras; one and the same things or two different collections?
What is deficient in the Gospel of Buddha in comparison of the above?
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Teachings of the Buddha's were passed on by word of mouth for about 200 years following his death before being written down. So far as I know, there is no set of teachings "canonized by the Buddha", albeit the myth that there is such a canon probably appeals to a certain kind of naivety.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
No, probably, and depends on what you mean by authentic, but the Gospel of Buddha was certainly derived from its scriptures, so in any case, for one to be false the other would have to be as well.

I don't say anyone of them is false.
If there is a contradiction in both; how to resolve it?
 

Gjallarhorn

N'yog-Sothep
While both of you are more right than anyone could ever be, he DID say "concise". The Pali Canon and the Sutras are very extensive. Not concise at all.
I've never come across a good compilation of them...it's rather annoying that most books available are nothing but the parables or stuff about the Dalai Lama (which is no help at all, honestly).
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
While both of you are more right than anyone could ever be, he DID say "concise". The Pali Canon and the Sutras are very extensive. Not concise at all.

Thanks for elaborating the word "concise" from my post.

It is the clergy or the priesthood that makes them extensive so that they could hold a control over the ordinary persons like me. They are like a donkey loaded with books; hardly understanding what has been loaded on the back.

Buddha and Jesus spoke strongly against the prevalent priesthood.

I found the Gospel of Buddha very interesting; the author has avoided much of the myth and story-telling and has put the essence before the reader in a systematic manner. I have not yet finished reading it; even the part read by up to now me is sufficient to know the truth of Buddha.

I quote from the Gospel of Buddha; but I also read the other suttas intently which my friends here present and get benefitted.

Regards
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Was it canonized by Buddha?
Is it in the original language Buddha spoke?
What is its authenticity?


(Hint, the Gospel of Buddha was written in 1894 by a German/American and reflects western philosophy)

I agree that the Gospel of Buddha was written by Paul Carus in 1894, in fact it is a collection of tradition and nothing is written or added by Paul Carus in it from himself; but I don't agree with you that it reflects western philosophy.

There is no western religious philosophy; if there is one please inform us about it.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Buddha said:

"Since then, O bhikkhus, there is no self, there can not
be any after life of a self. Therefore abandon all thought
of self. But since there are deeds and since deeds continue,
be careful with your deeds. 31
"All beings have karma as their portion: they are heirs
of their karma; they are sprung from their karma; their
karma is their kinsman; their karma is their refuge; karma
allots beings to meanness or to greatness. 32

"Assailed by death in life's last throes
On quitting all thy joys and woes
What is thine own, thy recompense?
What stays with thee when passing hence?
What like a shadow follows thee
And will Beyond thine heirloom be? 33
Verses-31-33:Chapter-Chapter 40:

The Gospel of Buddha

Paarsurrey: Perhaps Buddha is not denying the life in hereafter, as he links it to denial of the self, while the person (with the self does exist).
“What stays with thee when passing hence?” Verse: 32. The actions/karma/deeds or the Aamals (in Arabic) go with one in the hereafter, so good deeds go to heaven or the hereafter.

I appreciate Buddha's words.
 

Tathagata

Freethinker
Was it canonized by Buddha?

Yes. The Pali Canon and the Mahayana Sutras both.

"Various scholars have voiced that some of the contents of the Pali Canon (and its main teachings) can be attributed to Gautama Buddha. Richard Gombrich argues that the main preachings of the Buddha (as in the Vinaya and Sutta Pitaka) probably go back to the Buddha individually.[20] Some scholars argue that the teachings are coherent and cogent, and must be the work of a single genius: the Buddha himself, not a committee of followers after his death.[21][22]
J.W. de Jong has stated that parts of the Pali Canon could very well have been proclaimed by the Buddha, and subsequently transmitted and developed by his disciples and, finally, codified in fixed formulas.[23] A. Wynne has said that the Pali Canon includes texts which go back to the very beginning of Buddhism, which perhaps include the substance of the Buddha’s teaching, and in some cases, maybe even his words.[24]
A.K. Warder has stated that there is no evidence to suggest that the shared teaching of the early schools was formulated by anyone else than the Buddha and his immediate followers.[25]

-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pali_Canon


Is it in the original language Buddha spoke?
Almost. The Buddha spoke Magadhi, a language that is not much different from Sanskrit and Pali.

It's also possible that the Buddha spoke multiple languages, thus speaking the language of the current canons.

What is its authenticity?
Authentic.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Yes. The Pali Canon and the Mahayana Sutras both.

"Various scholars have voiced that some of the contents of the Pali Canon (and its main teachings) can be attributed to Gautama Buddha. Richard Gombrich argues that the main preachings of the Buddha (as in the Vinaya and Sutta Pitaka) probably go back to the Buddha individually.[20] Some scholars argue that the teachings are coherent and cogent, and must be the work of a single genius: the Buddha himself, not a committee of followers after his death.[21][22]
J.W. de Jong has stated that parts of the Pali Canon could very well have been proclaimed by the Buddha, and subsequently transmitted and developed by his disciples and, finally, codified in fixed formulas.[23] A. Wynne has said that the Pali Canon includes texts which go back to the very beginning of Buddhism, which perhaps include the substance of the Buddha’s teaching, and in some cases, maybe even his words.[24]
A.K. Warder has stated that there is no evidence to suggest that the shared teaching of the early schools was formulated by anyone else than the Buddha and his immediate followers.[25]

-- P


Almost. The Buddha spoke Magadhi, a language that is not much different from Sanskrit and Pali.

It's also possible that the Buddha spoke multiple languages, thus speaking the language of the current canons.

Authentic.

All possibilities and conjectures; none for sure.
 
Top