Buddha’s experiences with Angulimala was a particularly special teaching for me for understanding the power of the Buddha Dhamma…on some people. Knowing what I know now, after studying the Buddha Dhamma, and practicing the Eightfold Path, I can understand HOW the Buddha Dhamma can have the effect it did with someone like Angulimala; when one’s ignorance about the nature of reality is completely eradicated. For me, well…there is no turning back, it would be utterly impossible. Once the vale of ignorance is lifted by experience, an you see the world with new knowledge, the road behind you simple disappears.
Sometimes in my papers, I find that if I do not use the Sanksrit word, people get confused until I explain the different. This is usually the case with the word karma and prajna. There are many famous Mahayana monks and nuns in the West that have caused such to become household words. I usually take the time to explain the difference between the Pali & Sanskrit. I am curious to know the sutta associated with your mention: “The Buddha prohibited the use of the Sanskrit language to teach Buddha Dhamma.” That would be a useful sutta to know.
Paticca Samuppada (Dependent Co-arising/Dependent Origination): पटिच्चसमुप्पाद Yes, I am familiar with this. I understand it to be the causal genesis (if you will) of all things. I try and always figure out the meaning of a Pali word from its concatenated parts. Like pati-icca-sama-uppada. When examining the construction of the Pali language, which I understand is close to the Magadhi Pakrit language, it is no wonder why the Buddha chose the common vernacular language to teach with rather than the Brahmi or Sanskrit languages.
(See: “Ashokan India was speaking Prakrit and not Sanskrit Hindutwavadis like to project that the main stream of Indian thought flows through Sanskrit. This is totally false, as can be seen by historical evidences of epigraphs. Original inscriptions were not Sanskrit. Apart from Ashoka’s edicts, the most ancient inscriptions of Arekmedu, which talk of Buddha’s teachings, were not in Sanskrit but in Prakrit. Another European authority Dr. J. Filliozat is worth quoting in this respect. http://www.ambedkar.org/brahmanism/BRAHMANISM_CONTROLLED_MASSES_THROUGH_LANGUAGE.htm ]
[See also interesting note by
Thanissaro Bhikkhu: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc2.pdf (“Note Cv.V.33.1”)
[uppada (उप्पाद): https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/pali_query.py?qs=upp%C4%81da&searchhws=yes&matchtype=exact%5D
With regard to “the outline:” You had made the following statement in an earlier comment, but I see now that I must have misunderstood what you meant.
“I am just trying to get an idea of how to make an outline. If you don’t like to discuss those details, I understand. But without some sort of background, I am afraid I cannot help much.”
With regard to:
“I wish more people would spend time as you do critically examining the teachings of the Buddha. Most “teachers” of Buddha Dhamma in the Western world today just translate deep suttas word by word (using outdated dictionaries) and that has produced awful results.”
I find that the more I understand the Buddha Dhamma, the more protective of it I become. Most Western Buddhists would do well to drop Buddhism (the religion concept) and focus on the Buddha Dhamma. Buddha-ism, to me, has the same effect on the Buddha Dhamma as the Sanskrit. Westerner’s do what Westerners always do: If something appears to have a value they will find a way to commoditize it for profit, which of course completely changes the purpose and value of the Buddha Dhamma. Sometimes, in regard to this, I feel very alone in the West indeed.
I am happy that you are enjoying the paper I wrote. Of course, it could have been a lot longer and more involved, but as I said before, my target audience is people who have little to no knowledge of the Buddha or his teachings.