Editing Four Noble Truths (section)

===Development===

====Growing importance====
Buddhologist Eviatar Shulman proposes that in its original form the Four Truths were rooted in meditative perception of mental events, building on his analysis of the Pāli term ayam which is equivalent, he claims, to an immediate perception, such as this here right now in front of me.<ref>Shulman, Eviatar Rethinking the Buddha (Cambridge University Press, 2017), p. 140 ff.</ref>

According to Bronkhorst, the four truths may already have been formulated in earliest Buddhism, but did not have the central place they acquired in later buddhism.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=107}} According to Anderson, only by the time of the commentaries, in the fifth century CE, did the four truths come to be identified in the Theravada tradition as the central teaching of the Buddha.{{sfn|Anderson|1999|pp=55–56}}{{refn|group=note|Anderson: "However, the four noble truths do not always appear in stories of the Buddha's enlightenment where we might expect to find them. This feature may indicate that the four noble truths emerged into the canonical tradition at a particular point and slowly became recognized as the first teaching of the Buddha. Speculations about early and late teachings must be made relative to other passages in the Pali canon because of a lack of supporting extratextual evidence. Nonetheless, it is still possible to suggest a certain historical development of the four noble truths within the Pali canon. What we will find is a doctrine that came to be identified as the central teaching of the Buddha by the time of the commentaries in the fifth century C.E."{{sfn|Anderson|1999|pp=55–56}}}} According to Anderson,

{{Blockquote|... the four noble truths were probably not part of the earliest strata of what came to be recognized as Buddhism, but that they emerged as a central teaching in a slightly later period that still preceded the final redactions of the various Buddhist canons.{{sfn|Anderson|1999|p=21}}}}

According to Feer and Anderson, the four truths probably entered the Sutta Pitaka from the Vinaya, the rules for monastic order.{{sfn|Anderson|1999|pp=74, 77}}{{refn|group=note|Anderson refers to Léon Feer, who already in 1870 "suggested the possibility that the four noble truths emerged into Buddhist literature through ''vinaya'' collections."{{sfn|Anderson|2001|p=183}} She also refers to Bareau, who noticed the consistency between the two versions in the ''Mahavagga'', part of the ''Vinaya'', and the ''Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta'' of the Buddha's enlightenment: "As Bareau noted, the consistency between these two versions of the Buddha's enlightenment is an indication that the redactors of the Theravada canon probably brought the two accounts into agreement with each other at a relatively late point in the formation of the canon.<br />Leon Feer had already suggested in 1870 that the versions of the four noble truths found in the sutras and suttas were derived from the vinaya rescensions in the larger body of Buddhist literature; Bareau's conclusion builds on this claim."{{sfn|Anderson|1999|p=74}}}} They were first added to enlightenment-stories which contain the Four Jhanas, replacing terms for "liberating insight".{{sfn|Anderson|1999|p=148}}{{refn|group=note|According to Schmithausen, in his often-cited article ''On some Aspects of Descriptions or Theories of 'Liberating Insight' and 'Enlightenment' in Early Buddhism'', the mention of the four noble truths as constituting "liberating insight", which is attained after mastering the Rupa Jhanas, is a later addition to texts such as Majjhima Nikaya 36.{{sfn|Schmithausen|1981}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p={{page needed|date=November 2020}}}}{{sfn|Vetter|1988}}}} From there they were added to the biographical stories of the Buddha.{{sfn|Anderson|1999|p=17}}{{refn|group=note|Anderson refers to research by K.R. Norman, Bareau, Skilling, Schmithausen and Bronkhorst.{{sfn|Anderson|1999|pp=19–20}}}}

====Substituting "liberating insight"====
Scholars have noted inconsistencies in the presentations of the Buddha's enlightenment, and the Buddhist path to liberation, in the oldest sutras. They argue that these inconsistencies show that the Buddhist teachings evolved, either during the lifetime of the Buddha, or thereafter.<!--**START OF NOTE**-->{{refn|group=note|name="development of teachings"|See:
* La Vallee Possin (1937), ''Musila et Narada''; reprinted in Gombrich (2006), ''How Buddhism Began'', appendix
* Erich Frauwallner (1953), ''Geschichte der indischen Philosophie'', Band  ''Der Buddha und der Jina'' (pp. 147–272)
* Andre Bareau (1963), ''Recherches sur la biographiedu Buddha dans les Sutrapitaka et les Vinayapitaka anciens'', Ecole Francaise d'Extreme-Orient
* Schmithausen, ''On some Aspects of Descriptions or Theories of 'Liberating Insight' and 'Enlightenment' in Early Buddhism''. In: Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus (Gedenkschrift für Ludwig Alsdorf), hrsg. von Klaus Bruhn und Albrecht Wezler, Wiesbaden 1981, 199–250.
* {{Citation | last =Griffiths | first =Paul | year =1981 | title =Concentration or Insight; The Problematic of Theravada Buddhist Meditation-theory | journal =The Journal of the American Academy of Religion| issue =4 | pages =605–624 | doi =10.1093/jaarel/XLIX.4.605 }}
* K.R. Norman, [https://web.archive.org/web/20160309183447/http://ahandfulofleaves.org/documents/articles/the%20four%20noble%20truths_norman_pts_2003.pdf Four Noble Truths'']
* {{harvnb|Bronkhorst|1993|loc=chapter 8}}
* Tilman Vetter (1988), [https://web.archive.org/web/20150226092253/http://ahandfulofleaves.org/documents/The%20Ideas%20and%20Meditative%20Practices%20of%20Early%20Buddhism_Vetter.pdf ''The Ideas and Meditative Practices of Early Buddhism, by Tilmann Vetter'']
* {{cite book | author =Richard F. Gombrich | title =How Buddhism Began: The Conditioned Genesis of the Early Teachings |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hQOAAgAAQBAJ | year =2006 | orig-year =1996 | publisher =Routledge | isbn =978-1-134-19639-5}}, chapter four
* {{harvnb|Anderson|1999}}
* {{harvnb|Wynne|2007}}}}<!--**END OF NOTE**--> According to the Japanese scholar Ui, the four truths are not the earliest representation of the Buddha's enlightenment. Instead, they are a rather late theory on the content of the Buddha's enlightenment.{{sfn|Hirakawa|1990|p=28}} According to Vetter and Bronkhorst, the earliest Buddhist path consisted of a set of practices which culminate in the practice of ''dhyana'',{{sfn|Vetter|1988|pp=xxi–xxxvii}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|pp=93–111}} leading to a calm of mind and [[Sati (Buddhism)|awareness]] (mindfulness){{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxv}} which according to Vetter ''is'' the liberation which is being sought.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|pp=xxi–xxxvii}}{{refn|group=note|Note that ''dhyana'' is not the same as ''samatha'', the calming of the mind by one-pointedly concentration. While ''dhyana'' also leads to a calm of mind, it aids in developing mindfulness, which is necessary to be aware of the arising of disturbing, selfish, thoughts and emotions, and to counter them. Wynne: "...the Buddha taught a 'middle way' between pure meditation and cognitive practices. The states of absorption induced by meditation were considered useful and necessary, but, in distinction from the meditative mainstream, their ultimate aim was insight. For the Buddha, it was vitally important that the meditative adept should apply his concentrative state to the practice of mindfulness (Sn 1070: ''satima''; Sn 1111: ''ajjhattañ ca bahiddha ca nabhinandato''; Sn 1113: ''ajjhattañ ca bahiddha ca natthi ti passato''), and work towards the attainment of insight. According to this view, meditation alone, the goal of the meditative mainstream, would have been harshly criticized in the earliest Buddhism."{{sfn|Wynne|2007|p=105}}}} Later on, "liberating insight" came to be regarded as equally liberating.{{sfn|Gombrich|1997|pp=99–102}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|pp=93–111}} This "liberating insight" came to be exemplified by ''prajna'', or the insight in the "four truths",{{sfn|Gombrich|1997|pp=99–102}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|pp=93–111}} but also by other elements of the Buddhist teachings.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|pp=xxi–xxxvii}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|loc=chapter 7}} According to Vetter and Bronkhorst, this growing importance of "liberating insight" was a response to other religious groups in India, which held that a liberating insight was indispensable for ''[[moksha]]'', liberation from rebirth.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|pp=xxxii, xxxiii}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|pp=54–55, 96, 99}}{{refn|group=note|Tillmann Vetter: "Very likely the cause was the growing influence of a non-Buddhist spiritual environment·which claimed that one can be released only by some truth or higher knowledge. In addition the alternative (and perhaps sometimes competing) method of discriminating insight (fully established after the introduction of the four noble truths) seemed to conform so well to this claim."{{sfn|Vetter|1988|p=xxxiii}}<br /><br />According to Bronkhorst, this happened under influence of the "mainstream of meditation", that is, Vedic-Brahmanical oriented groups, which believed that the cessation of action could not be liberating, since action can never be fully stopped. Their solution was to postulate a fundamental difference between the inner soul or self and the body. The inner self is unchangeable, and unaffected by actions. By insight into this difference, one was liberated. To equal this emphasis on insight, Buddhists presented insight into their most essential teaching as equally liberating. What exactly was regarded as the central insight "varied along with what was considered most central to the teaching of the Buddha."{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|pp=54–55, 96, 99}}}} This change is reflected in the canon, where, according to Bronkhorst,

{{Blockquote|...the accounts which include the Four Noble Truths had a completely different conception of the process of liberation than the one which includes the Four Dhyanas and the destruction of the intoxicants.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=110}}}}

According to Vetter and Bonkhorst, the ideas on what exactly constituted this "liberating insight" was not fixed but developed over time.{{sfn|Vetter|1988|pp=xxi–xxxvii}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|loc=chapter 7}} According to Bronkhorst, in [[Presectarian Buddhism|earliest Buddhism]] the four truths did not serve as a description of "liberating insight".{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=107}} Initially the term ''prajna'' served to denote this "liberating insight". Later on, ''prajna'' was replaced in the suttas by the "four truths".{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|pp=99–100, 102–111}}{{sfn|Anderson|1999|p={{page needed|date=November 2020}}}} This happened in those texts where practicing the four jhanas preceded the attainment of "liberating insight", and where this practice of the four jhanas then culminates in "liberating insight".{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=108}} This "liberating insight" came to be defined as "insight into the four truths", which is presented as the "liberating insight" which constituted the [[Enlightenment in Buddhism|awakening]], or "enlightenment" of the Buddha. When he understood these truths he was "enlightened" and liberated,{{refn|group=note|"Enlightenment" is a typical western term, which bears its own, specific western connotations, meanings and interpretations.{{sfn|Cohen|2006}}{{sfn|Sharf|1995}}{{sfn|Sharf|2000}}}} as reflected in Majjhima Nikaya 26:42: "his taints are destroyed by his seeing with wisdom."{{sfn|Bhikkhu Nanamoli (translator)|1995|p=268}}

Bronkhorst points to an inconsistency, noting that the four truths refer here to the eightfold path as the means to gain liberation, while the attainment of insight into the four truths is portrayed as liberating in itself.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p={{page needed|date=November 2020}}}} According to Bronkhorst, this is an inconsistency which reveals a change which took place over time in the composition of the sutras.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p={{page needed|date=November 2020}}}} An example of this substitution, and its consequences, is Majjhima Nikaya 36:42–43, which gives an account of the awakening of the Buddha.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|pp=102–103}}

According to Schmithausen, the four truths were superseded by ''[[pratityasamutpada]]'', and still later, in the Hinayana schools, by the doctrine of the [[Anatta|non-existence of a substantial self or person]].{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|pp=100–101}} Schmithausen further states that still other descriptions of this "liberating insight" exist in the Buddhist canon:
{{Blockquote|"that the five Skandhas are impermanent, disagreeable, and neither the Self nor belonging to oneself";{{refn|group=note|Majjhima Nikaya 26}} "the contemplation of the arising and disappearance (''udayabbaya'') of the five Skandhas";{{refn|group=note|Anguttara Nikaya II.45 (PTS)}} "the realisation of the Skandhas as empty (''rittaka''), vain (''tucchaka'') and without any pith or substance (''asaraka'').{{refn|group=note|Samyutta Nikaya III.140–142 (PTS)}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=101}}}}

In contrast, Thanissaro Bikkhu presents the view that the four truths, [[pratityasamutpada]] and anatta are inextricably intertwined.<ref group=web>{{cite web |website=accestoinsight.org |title=Wings to Awakening Part 3 |url=https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/part3.html#part3-h-1}}</ref>