Astus wrote:The Chinese Canon - in fact, several canons edited in China - contains thousands of texts, including multiple translations of the same work, but they did not start any movement saying that "nobody and everybody is correct". Since Buddhism never had a uniform and single Holy Scripture, the diversity of texts has been always present. At the end of the day, it is naturally MY (teacher's) BUDDHISM is the truest.
The point of the article that impressed me had not to do with diversity of translations so much, as that different languages have different versions of a text, all of which are of the same date
. So there is no Ur-text, but parallel recensions, which means (for now) that no lineage, sect or school can brag that they represent fully & accurately what Buddha taught. Everyone has versions
of what Buddha taught and we cannot say, based on the texts, that any one version is exactly what he said; only that it is a report of what someone recalled
This will (hopefully) lead to the dying of sectarianism and the accepting of the plausibility that many Dharma heresies of the "lower" "mistaken" schools may have been genuine Dharma teachings direct from Buddha.