The Buddha and the Upanishads

[Christian K. Wedemeyer]

Thanks to Lance for reading closely. No, I was not arguing for the 
"strong view." Jonathan, I think, puts it well and succinctly:

>So, can we date some Pali materials with confidence to some period 
>prior to Buddhaghosa, even if precise wording is sometimes in 
>question? Yes. Can we internally stratify some materials, at least 
>on philological/linguistic grounds? Yes. Does this provide us with 
>any absolute chronology locating anything in Buddhist materials 
>surely in the 5th c BCE? No. We cannot move back earlier than the 
>beginning of the Common Era, as far as I can tell.

This, I would assume, would be the general consensus view in the 
field, which was why I was surprised at intimations to the contrary. 
Given that much the same is true of the Upanisadic corpus as Jonathan 
notes of the corpus of Buddhist aagama-s/nikaaya-s--and given that 
both corpora shows signs of mutual influence--I think Matthew's 
assessment is quite sound; that is:

>the texts and traditions evolved in dialogue with one another and 
>arrived at their "finished"
>forms in processes spanning centuries.

Thus, one shouldn't (as Tim appears to) take my reservations about 
putting the words of the nikaaya-s in the mouth of Gotama to imply 
that any given Upanisadic passage is necessarily any earlier than any 
given Buddhist passage.

With best regards,

Christian (taking a break from "active engagement in philological 
work" to dither around his computer)



-- 
Christian K. Wedemeyer
Assistant Professor of the History of Religions
The University of Chicago Divinity School
1025 East 58th Street
Chicago, Illinois 60637    USA
(773) 702-8265 (phone)
(773) 702-8223 (fax)