Tagged: Historiography
Pages with this tag
Collins - On The Very Idea Of The Pali Canon (1990)
1Steven Collins argues that the Pali Canon should not be seen as the pre-existing foundation of Theravāda Buddhism, but rather as a product created by the Mahāvihāra monastic lineage in Ceylon during the first millennium A.D. as a strategy for legitimation. This development was driven by a rivalry with the competing Abhayagiri monastery, which accepted a wider range of scriptures. The Mahāvihāra monks established their authority by creating a closed, exclusive list of texts defined as the historical "Buddha's Word" (`buddhavacana`), committing these texts and their commentaries to writing, standardizing their interpretation through figures like Buddhaghosa, and authoring historical chronicles (`vamsa`) to construct a singular, legitimate line of succession. Collins concludes that while the *idea* of a fixed canon was ideologically crucial for establishing this orthodoxy, in practice, the religious life of Theravāda cultures has always drawn from a much broader selection of canonical and non-canonical works, making the concept of the canon more significant than its specific textual contents.
Drewes - The Idea Of The Historical Buddha (2017)
2In a reevaluation of the Buddha's historicity, David Drewes argues that scholarship has never actually established that the Buddha was a real person and that he cannot be properly considered a historical figure. The author traces the development of the idea from the early nineteenth century, when the Buddha's existence was an open question, through the pivotal work of scholars like Eugène Burnouf, who separated the final Buddha, Śākyamuni, from his mythical predecessors based on Nepalese tradition rather than new evidence. Drewes contends that subsequent influential scholars, such as T.W. Rhys Davids and Hermann Oldenberg, cemented the Buddha's historicity not through factual discovery but by presupposing it and defending it with fallacious arguments, such as the logical necessity of a founder or appeals to a scholarly consensus that was not yet established. Even major twentieth-century proponents like E.J. Thomas, Étienne Lamotte, and André Bareau admitted that no reliable historical data could be extracted from the legends. Drewes concludes that since early texts depict a generic, supernatural being rather than a specific individual—with names like "Siddhārtha" being late additions and clan names like "Śākya" being potentially mythical—the Buddha belongs in the same category as other ahistorical founders like Vyāsa or Laozi, whose existence is a matter of belief rather than empirical fact.
Hinüber - The Historical Dr. Drewes And The Buddha (2023)
3In a rebuttal to Dr. Drewes's critique, Oskar von Hinüber defends his argument for the Buddha as a historical person by asserting that Drewes focuses on the opinions of other scholars rather than engaging with primary sources. Hinüber reiterates his own method, which involves analyzing the earliest possible texts for linguistic clues and for details that were later suppressed by the tradition, as these are likely to contain fragments of historical memory. He refutes Drewes's specific counterarguments concerning the Upaka episode and the Jambu tree meditation, defending his philological analysis and dismissing Drewes's claims of textual corruption and flawed mythological parallels. Ultimately, Hinüber argues that while a full biography is impossible, a vivid historical memory existed in ancient India, distinct from formal historiography, and that traces of this memory of a real person can be found in the oldest Buddhist texts through careful scholarly application rather than abstract debate.
Salomon - What Happened To Buddhism In India? (2018)
4Richard Salomon's essay explores the complex and controversial question of why Buddhism disappeared from India around the 13th century after thriving for over a millennium. Critiquing the common practice of listing multiple, disconnected causes—such as loss of patronage, persecution, internal decay, and Muslim invasions—Salomon argues that asking "why" is less fruitful than asking "how" the decline occurred. He contrasts the two dominant scholarly narratives - the "friendly embrace" theory, which posits that Hinduism peacefully assimilated a weakened Buddhism (Monier-Williams, R.C. Mitra), and the opposing view of relentless hostility and persecution (Giovanni Verardi). Through an analysis of several inscriptions, Salomon demonstrates a long and complex process of syncretism and absorption, showing the Buddha's incorporation as an avatāra of Viṣṇu, the equation of Buddhist and Hindu deities, and the veneration of Hindu gods like Vāsudeva within Buddhist contexts from an early period. Ultimately, he concludes that the most compelling explanation for Buddhism's demise is its gradual assimilation into the broader Hindu religious milieu, which caused it to lose its distinct identity over time.