Old, old scrolls (and a religion comparison)

On the weekend, I was sent down the path of learning a bit more about the oldest Buddhist writings in existence, and although I may have heard the name "the Gandharan scrolls" before, it was only by watching a couple of professors on Youtube that I realised how interesting a field of research this is.

This is all a little complicated, but if I have it right, the story is roughly this:

a.    The Pali canon, in the Pali language, is seen as the earliest Buddhist text and is therefore often spoken about as the closest thing preserving the original teachings (of the original Buddha).  Mahayana Buddhism is the later breakaway, from around 200 CE, with elaborations of doctrine not thought to be all that related to the original thoughts of the original Buddha;

b.    However, the earliest partial texts of it had only dated back to around the 5th to 6th century CE, and the earliest complete physical set of it entirety is from about a thousand years later!

c.    It seems that the scriptures were first preserved for hundreds of years orally.  This summary is from Wikipedia:

According to a late section of the Pali Canon, the Buddha taught the three pitakas.^[21] It is traditionally believed by Theravadins that most of the Pali Canon originated from the Buddha and his immediate disciples. According to the scriptures, a council was held shortly after the Buddha's passing to collect and preserve his teachings. The Theravada tradition states that the Canon was recited orally from the 5th century to the first century BC, when it was written down.^[22] The memorization was reinforced by regular communal recitations. The tradition holds that only a few later additions were made. The Theravādin pitakas were first written down in Sri Lanka in the Alu Viharaya Temple no earlier than 29–17 BC.^[23] 

d.   However, it was only in the mid 1990's that it was realised there was a treasure trove of old Buddhist texts, inconveniently written on birch bark which had been buried in jars (reason unknown), from the old area of Gandhara, which is now Pakistan/Afghanistan.  These have been dated back to the first century CE, which dramatically pushes back the age of the oldest written examples of Buddhist scriptures.    It has been compared to the Dead Sea Scrolls, quite aptly.

e.    There seem to be two centres for research into these scrolls, one at the University of Washington, and one at the University of Sydney (Yah, Australia!)  

f.    The scrolls are extremely fragile, as this photo indicates:

 The article that this photo is from explains:

The scrolls are rolled up in a way which the scientists say “differentiates them from other artefacts in the area.” They are cigar-like and exceptionally fragile. So fragile in fact that if someone so much as breathed on them, they would crumble into powder, and Dr Allon explained that before being unfurled they are “exposed to moisture over several days” before the layers are slowly teased out. 

What a delicate job.

g.  From what I can gather, while translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls (discovered about 50 years or so before the Gandaran scrolls) has long been finished, the translation of the Buddhist ones, which I think is a more difficult task even from a translation point of view, continues.  

h.  The scrolls have shed considerable light on the development of Mahayana Buddhism, as one of the experts in the field explains:

Sprinkled among the many dozens of texts are ten examples of Mahayana sutras—including ones well known in Sanskrit, Tibetan, or Chinese, such as the “Perfection of Wisdom Sutra” and the “Bodhisattva Basket Sutra”—as well as others previously unknown in any language. These texts are leading scholars to rethink the long-debated origins of Mahayana Buddhism, revealing Gandhara to have been a—though not necessarily the—center of early Mahayana. The texts have also called into question the widespread assumption that the Mahayana sutras were originally composed or set down in Sanskrit, rather than a regional dialect such as Gandhari. Even more significant are the circumstances of the discovery of these ten Mahayana sutras; in every case, they constituted part of larger groups of manuscripts, the majority of which were non-Mahayana texts. Thus, we’re left with the impression that Mahayana Buddhism in the early centuries of the Common Era was not institutionally, and perhaps not even doctrinally, distinct from what later came to be called the “Hinayana” or “Lesser Vehicle.” All indications are that the more traditional or conservative practices coexisted with Mahayana ideas, even within the same monastic communities.

I think that is pretty interesting - indicating that differences in doctrine were not seen as immediate grounds for schism in quite the way it worked in Christianity?   

 

Anyway, I think this is all pretty fascinating, and reminds me of the similarities one can see between the development of Christianity and Buddhism.  Both have:

 

* oral traditions initially preserving stories of the original teachings prior to recording in writing (although Buddhism has a much longer stretch of that);

* expansion due to the conversion of a key political figure (Ashoka in 260 BCE, and around 500 odd years later, Constantine, and each time happening about 300 years after its originator died);

* missionary expansion;

* fragmentation into a lot of different schools;

* late 20th century discovery of buried/hidden scrolls which change the understanding of the early religion quite a lot;

*  some who even argue the originator of the religion didn't even exist.  Not sure that Buddhism has ever had something as radical as the "magic mushroom" theory of origins, though!