BAU or Buddha's life ... which came first?

Jan E.M. Houben j_e_m_houben at YAHOO.COM
Tue Dec 5 06:52:00 UTC 2006

Dear Luis,
Thanks, this is an important article. The author
apperently accepts, without questioning, the
classical view that the Vedic Upanisads including
the BAU are (just) before the life and teaching
of the Buddha. See for instance in the concluding
paragraph "The conceptions of life and world in
early Buddhism have thus inherited the
reflections on birth and death found in the old
Upanisads, and further explicated them."

--- Luis Gonzalez-Reimann <reimann at BERKELEY.EDU>

> Dear Jan,
> This article may be of some help:
> Goto, Toshifumi. 2005. Yajñavalkya's 
> Characterization of the Atman and the Four
> Kinds 
> of Suffering in Early Buddhism. Electronic 
> Journal of Vedic Studies 12, no. 2: 71-85.
> Online at:
> Luis
> _____
> At 09:15 AM 12/4/2006, you wrote:
> >Dear All,
> >One of the many problems of dating texts and
> >events in Indian cultural history concerns the
> >relative dates of the Brhad-Aranyaka-Upanisad
> and
> >the life of the Buddha. The 'traditional'
> view,
> >starting from estimates by Max Müller and
> others,
> >would place the old Vedic Upanisads, including
> >BAU, before the Buddha. Some have argued,
> >however, that the BAU was composed
> (finalized?)
> >after the Buddha (and after Panini). I
> remember
> >that Johannes Bronkhorst (The two traditions
> of
> >meditation) and Richard Gombrich have written
> on
> >this (in the 80s-90s). What are the latest
> >contributions on this topic in which a student
> of
> >mine is interested?
> >Thanks,
> >Jan Houben

Any questions? Get answers on any topic at  Try it now.

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list