<p>Please read the book &quot;<a href="https://ocbs.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/authenticity.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts</a>&quot; (hard copy can purchased <a href="https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1312911506" rel="nofollow noreferrer" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>) by Bhikkhu Sujato and Bhikkhu Brahmali.</p>
<p>The abstract states:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This work articulates and defends a single thesis: that the Early
Buddhist Texts originated in the lifetime of the Buddha or a little
later, because they were, in the main, spoken by the Buddha and his
contemporary disciples. This is the most simple, natural, and
reasonable explanation for the evidence.</p>
<p>Our argument covers two main areas:</p>
<ol>
<li>The grounds for distinguishing the Early Buddhist Texts (EBTs) from later Buddhist literature;</li>
<li>The evidence that the EBTs stem from close to the Buddha’s lifetime, and that they were generally spoken by the historical
Buddha.</li>
</ol>
<p>Most academic scholars of Early Buddhism cautiously affirm that it is
possible that the EBTs contain some authentic sayings of the Buddha.
We contend that this drastically understates the evidence. A
sympathetic assessment of relevant evidence shows that it is very
likely that the bulk of the sayings in the EBTs that are attributed to
the Buddha were actually spoken by him. It is very unlikely that most
of these sayings are inauthentic.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Please also see <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/29938/471">this answer</a>.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-20T04:45:24.720Z
2022-09-20T06:18:56.140Z
2022-09-20T06:18:56.140Z
ruben2020
<p>The truth is real arising and real vanishing relative suffering, trillion times per second. Another only left truth is Nibbana.</p>
<p>What can let people get in those both is &quot;Buddha say&quot; no matter from whoever.</p>
<p>However, normally people who can get in and keep &quot;Buddha say&quot; is the Jhana Mastery who memorize entire Tipitaka an other pali canon in Pali form.</p>
<p>The other else is individual which hard to prove their skill especially by the ordinary.</p>
<p>For me as an ordinary person who memorize some Sutta in pali, I normally advice either beginner or the older to go to meditate with Jhana Mastery who memorize entire Tipitaka instead of randomly reading by themselves.</p>
<p>It's because after I got in Tipitaka, I realized It's impossible for no-Jhana-person to read them all without confuse and misunderstood. Even I try to describe people by quoting the Sutta Pali directly whether how these all cannons are not conflict each other, they still quote them all to conflict each other instead because many reader has no Jhana, so they have no eyes to see what is really arising and what is only imagination.</p>
<p>Even a little misunderstood in Tipitaka could make the reader waste this entire special life to practice follow the Buddha. Why? Ariyuppavada and Cetokhila (Blaming the noble one and wrong decision of the noble one who Memorized Pali cannon through 2600 years).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-20T12:20:08.717Z
2022-09-21T12:07:42.873Z
2022-09-21T12:07:42.873Z
Bonn
<p>They're probably referring to (but not necessarily quoting from) <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_texts" rel="nofollow noreferrer">buddha-vacana</a>.</p>
<p>On this site that tends to mean the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripi%E1%B9%ADaka" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Tipiṭaka</a>, more specifically (or most usually) the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutta_Pi%E1%B9%ADaka" rel="nofollow noreferrer">suttapiṭaka</a>.</p>
<p>As for recommended references -- <a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/4109/254">English (or other European) translations of Pali Canon</a></p>
<p>I can't tell you about references to Mahayana literature.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-20T07:44:27.937Z
They're [lengthy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pali_Canon#/media/File:Tipitaka1.jpg) -- people also edit anthologies, and write introductions and summaries.
ChrisW
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-20T07:37:47.307Z
2022-09-20T07:37:47.307Z
ChrisW
<p>I think I correctly assume this Buddhism site is (appropriately)  open to many, if not all,  forms of Buddhism(?)  However, when folks say things like “Buddha said” I often wonder what to make of this.  Are there recommended well-researched references materials (hopefully, with relatively little ax-to-grind) to help with appreciating the validity of such statements?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-09-20T15:27:13.563Z
Yes on this site any school that self-identifies as Buddhist is on-topic. If you want to limit the replies to a question, you can use a tag e.g. [tag:zen] -- which implies that you only want answers from within the view of that school, and other answers (based only on the teachings of other schools) would be off-topic for that question. Normally people don't tag their questions that way and may get answers from more one than one school. Historically on this site a majaority of answers have been based on the Pali canon.
ChrisW
<reference-request>
How do we know 'Buddha says?'
# How do we know 'Buddha says?'

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-09-19)

I think I correctly assume this Buddhism site is (appropriately) open to many, if not all, forms of Buddhism(?) However, when folks say things like “Buddha said” I often wonder what to make of this. Are there recommended well-researched references materials (hopefully, with relatively little ax-to-grind) to help with appreciating the validity of such statements?

**Tags:** reference-request

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Yes on this site any school that self-identifies as Buddhist is on-topic. If you want to limit the replies to a question, you can use a tag e.g. [tag:zen] -- which implies that you only want answers from within the view of that school, and other answers (based only on the teachings of other schools) would be off-topic for that question. Normally people don't tag their questions that way and may get answers from more one than one school. Historically on this site a majaority of answers have been based on the Pali canon.  

---

## 3 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2022-09-20. Score: 4

They're probably referring to (but not necessarily quoting from) [buddha-vacana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_texts).

On this site that tends to mean the [Tipiṭaka](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripi%E1%B9%ADaka), more specifically (or most usually) the [suttapiṭaka](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutta_Pi%E1%B9%ADaka).

As for recommended references -- [English (or other European) translations of Pali Canon](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/q/4109/254)

I can't tell you about references to Mahayana literature.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: They're [lengthy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pali_Canon#/media/File:Tipitaka1.jpg) -- people also edit anthologies, and write introductions and summaries.  

---

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-09-20. Score: 2

Please read the book "[The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts](https://ocbs.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/authenticity.pdf)" (hard copy can purchased [here](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1312911506)) by Bhikkhu Sujato and Bhikkhu Brahmali.

The abstract states:

> This work articulates and defends a single thesis: that the Early
> Buddhist Texts originated in the lifetime of the Buddha or a little
> later, because they were, in the main, spoken by the Buddha and his
> contemporary disciples. This is the most simple, natural, and
> reasonable explanation for the evidence.
>
> Our argument covers two main areas:
>
> 1. The grounds for distinguishing the Early Buddhist Texts (EBTs) from later Buddhist literature;
> 2. The evidence that the EBTs stem from close to the Buddha’s lifetime, and that they were generally spoken by the historical
>    Buddha.
>
> Most academic scholars of Early Buddhism cautiously affirm that it is
> possible that the EBTs contain some authentic sayings of the Buddha.
> We contend that this drastically understates the evidence. A
> sympathetic assessment of relevant evidence shows that it is very
> likely that the bulk of the sayings in the EBTs that are attributed to
> the Buddha were actually spoken by him. It is very unlikely that most
> of these sayings are inauthentic.

Please also see [this answer](https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/29938/471).


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2022-09-20. Score: 1

The truth is real arising and real vanishing relative suffering, trillion times per second. Another only left truth is Nibbana.

What can let people get in those both is "Buddha say" no matter from whoever.

However, normally people who can get in and keep "Buddha say" is the Jhana Mastery who memorize entire Tipitaka an other pali canon in Pali form.

The other else is individual which hard to prove their skill especially by the ordinary.

For me as an ordinary person who memorize some Sutta in pali, I normally advice either beginner or the older to go to meditate with Jhana Mastery who memorize entire Tipitaka instead of randomly reading by themselves.

It's because after I got in Tipitaka, I realized It's impossible for no-Jhana-person to read them all without confuse and misunderstood. Even I try to describe people by quoting the Sutta Pali directly whether how these all cannons are not conflict each other, they still quote them all to conflict each other instead because many reader has no Jhana, so they have no eyes to see what is really arising and what is only imagination.

Even a little misunderstood in Tipitaka could make the reader waste this entire special life to practice follow the Buddha. Why? Ariyuppavada and Cetokhila (Blaming the noble one and wrong decision of the noble one who Memorized Pali cannon through 2600 years).


---

