巴利语史籍怎么编故事的

时时是好时

某些人喜欢英文资料，也随手贴一点。

http://www.asiantribune.com/node/6629
"The myth of 'Lion ancestry' & adults-only tales of the Lala land."

------
According to the Mahavamsa and the Dipavansa, the son (Mahinda) and the daughter (Sangamitta) of the Indian Emperor Asoka were responsible for converting the King of Lanka and his people to Buddhism. However, Dr. V.A. Smith names the story in the Mahavamsa, related to this conversion as nothing but a ‘tissue of absurdities’ (V.A. Smith, Asoka page 45)”.

Prof. Herman Oldenberg (1854-1920), the great German scholar of Indology and professor, studied and researched the Buddha and his teachings in Pali. His study on the Buddha, published in 1881, helped popularize Buddhism and still remains continuously in print. In association with Thomas William Rhys Davids (1843 -1922), the British scholar of the Pali language, he founded the Pali Text Society in 1881. Professor Oldenberg translated three volumes of Vinaya Pitakaya texts and many other Pali texts and sutras into English. Thus the contributions made by these German and British scholars in providing broader access to the Buddhist scriptures written originally in Pali, (the language in which the texts of the Theravada school of Buddhism is preserved) are enormous.

In Herman Oldenberg’s assessment the stories related to the conversion of Sri Lanka to Buddhism by Mahinda and Sangamitta are pure inventions. As referred to by G.C. Mendis in The Mahavamsa or the Great Chronicle of Ceylon (1950 edition, page xvi and xvii) there are doubts as to why Asoka in his 13th century Rock Edicts, in the Rock-Edict XIII in particular, has failed to mention his own son Mahinda and daughter Sangamitta being handed over to the temple, and also their role in converting the Sri Lankan king to Buddhism.

Asoka, the Mayura emperor, whose imperial name was Devanampriya Priyadarsi, ruled from 273 to 232 BC. His Rock Edicts belong to the 13th year (260 BC) of his rule and the conversion of the Sri Lankan King to Buddhism took place - according to Sri Lankan chronicles - in the 18th year (255 BC) of Asoka’s rule. The contradiction is that there is a five year discrepancy between Asoka’s edict entries about the missionaries having already been dispatched to Sri Lanka, and the Mahavamsa records of the actual arrival of the missionaries in Sri Lanka. This is beyond comprehension.

Although the Mahavamsa says that Asoka handed over his own children to the temple and sent them to Sri Lanka to convert the King of Sri Lanka to Buddhism, Asoka has made no mention of this in his own Edicts.

The question that begs an answer is: if Mahinda and Sangamitta were really handed over to the temple to become Buddhist missionaries, and if they did really convert the Sri Lankan King Devanampiya Tissa to Buddhism, why would Asoka their father have neglected to record these important events in his own edicts? The name Sangamitta is, as V.A. Smith thinks, suspicious from its very meaning.

********************************

As long as the mythical stories of Mahavamsa are being elevated to reverence as historical proof of the origins of the Sinhala race and their historical mission as custodians of Buddhism, there will be no true understanding of our common true history.

The teaching of our history should not be twisted and turned to inspire illusive nationalistic superiority of one ethnicity against the other. All those who are born in Sri Lanka, who live and breathe on the paradise island of Sri Lanka today, do descend from shared common origins and are entwined together with one common history, common dreams, hopes for a peaceful prosperous future. We all have collective ownership of our common heritage. We all, with no exception!, should have equal birth rights to get inspiration from our common history and common heritage.

The Mahavamsa with all its historical importance, enormity and glory, should be only treated as the oldest and longest mythical chronicle, a historical poem written by great creative authors.