Editing Dhammapada (section)

== History ==
According to tradition, the Dhammapada's verses were spoken by [[Gautama Buddha|the Buddha]] on various occasions.<ref>Pertinent episodes allegedly involving the historic Buddha are found in the commentary (Buddharakkhita & Bodhi, 1985, p. 4).  In addition, a number of the Dhammapada's verses are identical with text from other parts of the Pali [[tipitaka]] that are directly attributed to the Buddha in the latter texts.  For instance, Dhammapada verses 3, 5, 6, 328-330 can also be found in [[Majjhima Nikaya|MN]] 128 (Ñā{{IAST|ṇ}}amoli & Bodhi, 2001, pp. 1009-1010, 1339 ''n''. 1187).</ref> Glenn Wallis states: "By distilling the complex models, theories, rhetorical style and sheer volume of the Buddha's teachings into concise, crystalline verses, the Dhammapada makes the Buddhist way of life available to anyone...In fact, it is possible that the very source of the Dhammapada in the third century B.C.E. is traceable to the need of the early Buddhist communities in India to laicize the ascetic impetus of the Buddha's original words."<ref>Wallis (2004), p. xi.</ref> The text is part of the [[Khuddaka Nikaya]] of the [[Sutta Pitaka]], although over half of the verses exist in other parts of the Pali Canon.<ref>Geiger (2004), p. 19, para. 11.2 writes:
{{quote|More than half the verses may be found also in other canonical texts.  The compiler of the [Dhammapada] however certainly did not depend solely on these canonical texts but also made use of the great mass of pithy sayings which formed a vast floating literature in India.}} In a similar vein, Hinüber (2000), p. 45, para. 90 remarks: "The contents of the [Dhammapada] are mainly gnomic verses, many of which have hardly any relation to Buddhism."</ref>  A 4th or 5th century CE [[atthakatha|commentary]] attributed to [[Buddhaghosa]] includes 305 stories which give context to the verses.

The Pāli Dhammapada is one of the most popular pieces of [[Theravada]] [[Pali literature|literature]].<ref name="best-known text" /> It is the oldest available manuscripts date to 1500 CE. A compiler is not named.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Roebuck |first=Valerie J. |date=2012-12-31 |title=Dhammapada, Dharmapada and Udanavarga: The Many Lives of a Buddhist Text |url=https://journal.equinoxpub.com/ROSA/article/view/11149 |journal=Religions of South Asia |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=225–244 |doi=10.1558/rosa.v6i2.225 |issn=1751-2697|url-access=subscription }}</ref> A [[Textual criticism|critical edition]] of the Dhammapada in Latin was produced by Danish scholar Viggo Fausbøll in 1855, becoming the first Pali text to receive this kind of examination by the European academic community.<ref name="hinuber_2">{{Cite book |last=v. Hinüber |first=Oskar |title=Macmillan Encyclopedia of Buddhism |publisher=Macmillan Reference USA |year=2006 |isbn=0-02-865910-4 |editor-last=Buswell |editor-first=Robert E. Jr. |place=USA |pages=216–17 |contribution=Dhammapada}}</ref>

=== Parallels ===
Although the [[Pāli]] edition is the best-known, a number of other versions are known:<ref name="Norman_papers">''Buddhist Studies Review'', 6, 2, 1989, page 153, reprinted in Norman, ''Collected Papers'', volume VI, 1996, Pali Text Society, Bristol, page 156</ref>
* "'''[[Gāndhārī language|Gāndhārī]] Dharmapada'''"&nbsp;– a version possibly of [[Dharmaguptaka]] or [[Kāśyapīya]] origin<ref>Brough (2001), pp.&nbsp;44–45, summarizes his findings and inferences as:
:"... We can with reasonable confidence say that the Gāndhārī text did not belong to the schools responsible for the Pali Dhammapada, the Udānavarga, and the Mahāvastu; and unless we are prepared to dispute the attribution of any of these, this excludes the Sarvāstivādins and the Lokottaravāda-Mahāsānghikas, as well as the Theravādins (and probably, in company with the last, the {{IAST|Mahīśāsakas}}).  Among possible claimants, the Dharmaguptakas and {{IAST|Kāśyapīyas}} must be considered as eligible, but still other possibilities cannot be ruled out."</ref> in Gāndhārī written in [[Kharosthi]] script<ref>Brough (2001).  The original manuscript is believed to have been written in the first or second century CE.</ref>
* "'''[[Patna]] Dharmapada'''"&nbsp;– a version in [[Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit]],<ref>See, e.g., [http://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Buddhist-Texts/C5-Patna/index.htm Cone (1989)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080515014737/http://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Buddhist-Texts/C5-Patna/index.htm |date=2008-05-15 }}.</ref> most likely of the [[Sammatiya|Sāmatiya sect]]<ref>''Journal of the Pali Text Society'', volume XXIII, pages 113f</ref>
* "'''[[Udanavarga|Udānavarga]]'''"&nbsp;– a seemingly related Mula-Sarvastivada or [[Sarvastivada]] text<ref>Brough (2001), pp. 38-41, indicates that the Udanavarga is of Sarvastivadin origin.</ref><ref>Hinüber (2000), p.&nbsp;45, para. 89, notes:
:More than half of [the Dhammapada verses] have parallels in corresponding collections in other Buddhist schools, frequently also in non-Buddhist texts.  The interrelation of these different versions has been obscured by constant contamination in the course of the text transmission.  This is particularly true in case of one of the Buddhist Sanskrit parallels.  The Udānavarga originally was a text corres[p]onding to the Pāli [[Udana|Udāna]]....  By adding verses from the Dhp [Dhammapada] it was transformed into a Dhp parallel in course of time, which is a rare event in the evolution of Buddhist literature.</ref> in
** 3 [[Sanskrit]] versions
** a Tibetan translation,<ref>Rockhill, William Woodville (trans.): Udānavarga : a collection of verses from the Buddhist canon compiled by Dharmatrāta being the Northern Buddhist version of Dhammapada / transl. from the Tibetan of the Bkah-hgyur, with notes and extracts from the commentary of Pradjnāvarman. London: Trübner 1883 [https://archive.org/details/udnavargacolle00bkah PDF] (9.1 MB)</ref> which is popular in traditional Tibetan Buddhism
* "'''[[Mahāvastu]]'''"&nbsp;– a [[Lokottaravāda]] text with parallels to verses in the Pāli Dhammapada's ''Sahassa Vagga'' and ''Bhikkhu Vagga''.<ref>Ānandajoti (2007), "Introduction," "Sahassavagga" and "Bhikkhuvagga."</ref>
* "'''FaJuJing 法句经'''"&nbsp;– 4 Chinese works; one of these appears to be an expanded translation of the Pali version; this has not traditionally been very popular.
** The ''Faju jing –'' translated and compiled by Weizhinan in 224 CE
** The ''Faju piyu jing –'' compiled by Faju and Fali between 290-306 CE
** The ''Chuyao jing'' ''–'' translated by Zhu Fonian in 383 CE
** The ''Faju yaosong jing'' ''–'' translated by Tianxizai between 980-999 CE<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Roebuck |first=Valerie J. |date=2012-12-31 |title=Dhammapada, Dharmapada and Udanavarga: The Many Lives of a Buddhist Text |url=https://journal.equinoxpub.com/ROSA/article/view/11149 |journal=Religions of South Asia |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=225–244 |doi=10.1558/rosa.v6i2.225 |issn=1751-2697|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

Comparing the Pali Dhammapada, the Gandhari Dharmapada and the Udanavarga, Brough (2001) identifies that the texts have in common 330 to 340 verses, 16 chapter headings and an underlying structure. He suggests that the three texts have a "common ancestor" but underlines that there is no evidence that any one of these three texts might have been the "primitive Dharmapada" from which the other two evolved.<ref>Brough (2001), pp.&nbsp;23–30.  After considering the hypothesis that these texts might lack a "common ancestor," Brough (2001), p.&nbsp;27, conjectures:
:On the evidence of the texts themselves it is much more likely that the schools, in some manner or other, had inherited from the period before the schisms which separated them, a definite tradition of a Dharmapada-text which ought to be included in the canon, however fluctuating the contents of this text might have been, and however imprecise the concept even of a 'canon' at such an early period. The differing developments and rearrangements of the inherited material would have proceeded along similar lines to those which, in the Brahmanical schools, produced divergent but related collections of texts in the different [[Yajur-veda]] traditions.
He then continues:
:... [When] only the common material [is] considered, a comparison of the Pali Dhammapada, the Gandhari text, and the Udanavarga, has produced no evidence whatsoever that any one of these has any superior claim to represent a 'primitive Dharmapada' more faithfully than the others.  Since the contrary appears to have been assumed from time to time, it is desirable to say with emphasis that the Pali text is ''not'' the primitive Dharmapada.  The assumption that it was would make its relationship to the other texts altogether incomprehensible.</ref>