There are several Buddhist canons, which refers to the various scriptural collections of Buddhist sacred scriptures or the various Buddhist scriptural canons. Some of these collections are also called Tipiá¹Âaka () or Tripiá¹Âaka () , meaning "Triple Basket", a traditional term for the three main divisions of some ancient canons. In ancient India, there were several Buddhist scriptural canons that were organized into three main textual divisions: Vinaya (monastic rule), Sutra (which contains teachings of the Buddha) and Abhidharma (which are more systematic and scholastic works). For example, the PÃÂli Tipiá¹Âaka is composed of the Vinaya Piá¹Âaka, the Sutta Piá¹Âaka, and the Abhidhamma Piá¹Âaka. In East Asian Buddhism meanwhile, the traditional term for the canon is Great Storage of Scriptures (traditional Chinese: 大èÂÂç¶Â; pinyin: Dàzàngjëng).
The PÃÂli Canon maintained by the TheravÃÂda tradition in Southeast Asia, the Chinese Buddhist Canon maintained by the East Asian Buddhist tradition, and the Tibetan Buddhist Canon maintained by the Tibetan Buddhist tradition are the three main important scriptural canons in the contemporary Buddhist world. The Nepalese canon, particularly its Buddhist Sanskrit literature has also been very important for modern Buddhist studies scholarship since it contains many surviving Sanskrit manuscripts. The Mongolian Buddhist canon (mostly a translation from the Tibetan into Classical Mongolian) is also important in Mongolian Buddhism.
While Tripiá¹Âaka is one common term to refer to the scriptural collections of the various Buddhist schools, most Buddhist scriptural canons (apart from the PÃÂli Canon) do not really follow the strict division into three piá¹Âakas. Indeed, many of the ancient Indian Buddhist schools had canons with four or five divisions rather than three. Likewise, neither the East Asian Buddhist canon nor the Tibetan canon is organized in a traditional Indian Tripiá¹Âaka schema.
Tipiá¹Âaka (PÃÂli), or Tripiá¹Âaka (Sanskrit: à ¤¤à ¥Âà ¤°à ¤¿à ¤ªà ¤¿à ¤Âà ¤Â), means "Three Baskets". It is a compound of the Pali ti or Sanskrit word of tri (à ¤¤à ¥Âà ¤°à ¤¿), meaning "three", and piá¹Âaka (à ¤ªà ¤¿à ¤Âà ¤Â), meaning "basket". These "three baskets" recall the receptacles of palm-leaf manuscripts and refer to three important textual divisions of early Buddhist literature: Suttas, the Vinaya, and the Abhidhamma.
Sutras were the doctrinal teachings in aphoristic or narrative format. The historical Buddha delivered all of his sermons in Magadhi Prakrit. This language was related to other Prakrits like Pali, though its exact nature is not fully known. The sutras were transmitted orally until eventually being written down in the first century BCE. Even within the Sà «tra Piá¹Âaka it is possible to detect older and later texts.
The Vinaya Piá¹Âaka appears to have grown gradually as a commentary and justification of the monastic code (PrÃÂtimoká¹£a), which presupposes a transition from a community of wandering mendicants (the Sà «tra Piá¹Âaka period) to a more sedentary monastic community (the Vinaya Piá¹Âaka period). These monastic codes have been transmitted across generations by vinayadharas, that is, "Bearers of the Discipline". The Vinaya focuses on the rules and regulations, or the morals and ethics, of monastic life that range from dress code and dietary rules to prohibitions of certain personal conducts.
The Abhidharma refers to more scholastic philosophical works. Many of these texts are later than the sutras and are school specific. Hence, the Sarvastivada school's Abhidharma Pitaka contains a completely different set of texts than the Theravada school's Abhidhamma collection.
While these three textual categories were very common in the canons of the early Buddhist schools, they were not the only ones. Some schools also had additional Pitakas other than the main three. These extra Pitakas included collections of incantations, magical spells or DhÃÂraá¹Âë which were called VidyÃÂdhÃÂra Piá¹Âaka, Mantra Piá¹Âaka or DhÃÂraá¹Âë Piá¹Âaka. Likewise, some Buddhist schools in India also maintained Bodhisattva Piá¹Âakas, which contained texts that were later termed "Mahayana".
The DvÃÂdaà ÂÃÂá¹ ga ("twelvefold [scriptural] division") refers to a traditional Indian classification scheme for the Buddhist scriptures, especially in early Indian Buddhism. It outlines twelve distinct types of discourse (aá¹ ga, âÂÂlimbâ or âÂÂcategoryâÂÂ) found in the Buddha's teachings. These categories are likely earlier than the later scriptural divisions. This twelvefold division appears in both à ÂrÃÂvakayÃÂna and MahÃÂyÃÂna sources, including the Lalitavistara, the MahÃÂyÃÂna Sà «trÃÂlaá¹ÂkÃÂra, and the Chinese ÃÂgama and MahÃÂyÃÂna sà «tra traditions. Some textual traditions have slightly different lists of aá¹ gas. Pali sources, for example, generally only list nine aá¹ gas. The aá¹ ga categories served both as a cataloging method and as a doctrinal affirmation of the Buddha's varied pedagogical methods.
The twelve aá¹ gas are:
Each of the early Buddhist Schools likely had their own versions of the Tripiá¹Âaka. According to some sources, there were some Indian schools of Buddhism that had five or seven piá¹Âakas.
According to Yijing, an 8th-century Chinese pilgrim to India, the Nikaya Buddhist schools kept different sets of canonical texts with some intentional or unintentional dissimilarities. Yijing notes four main textual collections among the non-Mahayana schools:
Yijing notes that though there were numerous sub-schools and sects, the sub-sects shared the Tripiá¹Âaka of their mother tradition (which he termed the "four principal schools of continuous tradition" or the "arya" traditions). However, this does not mean that the various sub-schools did not possess their own unique Tripiá¹Âaka. Xuanzang is said to have brought to China the Tripiá¹Âaka of seven different schools, including those of the above-mentioned schools as well as the Dharmaguptaka, KÃÂà Âyapëya, and Mahëà ÂÃÂsaka.
According to A. K. Warder, the Tibetan historian Bu-ston said that around or before the 1st century CE there were eighteen schools of Buddhism each with their own Tripiá¹Âaka transcribed into written form. However, except for one version that has survived in full and others, of which parts have survived, most of these texts are lost to history or yet to be found.
The MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika (Great Community) were a major early Buddhist branch, arising from the first schism in the Buddhist sangha (which occurred at some point around the time of Ashoka). While there is no single complete collection from any of the MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika school branches, there are several surviving texts including the MahÃÂvastu (Great Event), the MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika Vinaya (translated into Chinese by Buddhabhadra and Faxian in 416 CE, Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka 1425), the LokÃÂnuvartanàsà «tra (Taishà  No. 807) and the à Âariputraparipá¹Âcchà(Taisho 1465).
Various ancient sources (like BhÃÂvaviveka, and ParamÃÂrtha) also indicate that the different branches of the MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika tradition (such as the Bahuà Ârutëya) had a Bodhisattva Piá¹Âaka in their canon. The 6th century CE Indian monk ParamÃÂrtha wrote that 200 years after the parinirvÃÂá¹Âa of the Buddha, much of the MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika school moved north of RÃÂjagá¹Âha, where they became divided over whether the MahÃÂyÃÂna sà «tras should be incorporated formally into their Tripiá¹Âaka. According to this account, they split into three groups based upon the relative manner and degree to which they accepted the authority of these MahÃÂyÃÂna texts. ParamÃÂrtha states that the Kukkuá¹Âika sect did not accept the MahÃÂyÃÂna sà «tras as buddhavacana ("word of the Buddha"), while the LokottaravÃÂda sect and the EkavyÃÂvahÃÂrika sect did accept the MahÃÂyÃÂna sà «tras as buddhavacana. Also in the 6th century CE, Avalokitavrata writes of the MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghikas using a "Great ÃÂgama Piá¹Âaka," which is then associated with MahÃÂyÃÂna sà «tras such as the PrajñÃÂparamitàand the Daà Âabhà «mika Sà «tra.
According to some sources, Abhidharma was not accepted as canonical by the MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika school. The TheravÃÂdin Dëpavaá¹Âsa, for example, records that the MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghikas had no Abhidharma. However, other sources indicate that there were such collections of Abhidharma, and the Chinese pilgrims Faxian and Xuanzang both mention MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika Abhidharma. On the basis of textual evidence as well as inscriptions at NÃÂgÃÂrjunakoá¹Âá¸ÂÃÂ, Joseph Walser concludes that at least some MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika sects probably had an Abhidharma collection, and that it likely contained five or six books.
The Caitikas included a number of sub-sects including the Pà «rvaà Âailas, Aparaà Âailas, SiddhÃÂrthikas, and RÃÂjagirikas. In the 6th century CE, Avalokitavrata writes that MahÃÂyÃÂna sà «tras such as the PrajñÃÂparamitàand others are chanted by the Aparaà Âailas and the Pà «rvaà Âailas. Also in the 6th century CE, BhÃÂvaviveka speaks of the SiddhÃÂrthikas using a VidyÃÂdhÃÂra Piá¹Âaka, and the Pà «rvaà Âailas and Aparaà Âailas both using a Bodhisattva Piá¹Âaka, implying collections of MahÃÂyÃÂna texts within these Caitika schools.
The Bahuà Ârutëya school is said to have included a Bodhisattva Piá¹Âaka in their canon. The ', also called the ', is an extant abhidharma from the Bahuà Ârutëya school. This abhidharma was translated into Chinese in sixteen fascicles (Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka 1646). Its authorship is attributed to Harivarman, a third-century monk from central India. ParamÃÂrtha cites this Bahuà Ârutëya abhidharma as containing a combination of HënayÃÂna and MahÃÂyÃÂna doctrines, and Joseph Walser agrees that this assessment is correct.
The PrajñaptivÃÂdins held that the Buddha's teachings in the various piá¹Âakas were nominal (Skt. prajñapti), conventional (Skt. '), and causal (Skt. hetuphala). Therefore, all teachings were viewed by the PrajñaptivÃÂdins as being of provisional importance, since they cannot contain the ultimate truth. It has been observed that this view of the Buddha's teachings is very close to the fully developed position of the MahÃÂyÃÂna sà «tras.
The Sthavira nikÃÂya (Sanskrit "Grouping of the Elders") was a branch of the early Buddhist schools. They were one of the original two main divisions (the other being MahÃÂsÃÂá¹Âghika) during the first schism. The Sinhalese TheravÃÂda school's PÃÂli Canon is the only canon of the early Buddhist schools which survived in complete form. However, individual and fragmentary texts from other Sthavira branches have survived as well.
A complete version of the Dërgha ÃÂgama (Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka 1) of the Dharmaguptaka school was translated into Chinese by Buddhayaà Âas and Zhu Fonian (竺ä½Â念) in the Later Qin dynasty, dated to 413 CE. It contains 30 sà «tras in contrast to the 34 suttas of the Theravadin Dëgha NikÃÂya. A. K. Warder also associates the extant Ekottara ÃÂgama (Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka 125) with the Dharmaguptaka school, due to the number of rules for monastics, which corresponds to the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya. The Dharmaguptaka Vinaya is also extant in Chinese translation (Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka 1428), and Buddhist monastics in East Asia adhere to the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya.
The Dharmaguptaka Tripiá¹Âaka is said to have contained a total of five piá¹Âakas. These included a Bodhisattva Piá¹Âaka and a Mantra Piá¹Âaka (Ch. Ã¥ÂÂèÂÂ), also sometimes called a DhÃÂraá¹Âë Piá¹Âaka. According to the 5th-century Dharmaguptaka monk Buddhayaà Âas, the translator of the Dharmaguptaka Vinaya into Chinese, the Dharmaguptaka school had assimilated the MahÃÂyÃÂna Tripiá¹Âaka (Ch. 大ä¹Âä¸ÂèÂÂ).
The Mahëà ÂÃÂsaka Vinaya is preserved in Chinese translation (Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka 1421), translated by Buddhajëva and Zhu Daosheng in 424 CE.
Small portions of the of the KÃÂà Âyapëya school survive in Chinese translation. An incomplete Chinese translation of the Saá¹Âyukta ÃÂgama of the KÃÂà Âyapëya school by an unknown translator circa the Three Qin (ä¸Â秦) period (352-431 CE) survives.
The SarvÃÂstivÃÂda school was a major sect in North India. Since it enjoyed the patronage of Kanishka (c. 127âÂÂ150 CE), emperor of the Kushan Empire, they soon became one of the dominant sects of Buddhism in north India for centuries, flourishing throughout Northwest India, North India, and Central Asia. The SarvÃÂstivÃÂda school held a council in Kashmir during the reign of Kanishka II (c. 158âÂÂ176). In this council, their canonical texts were rendered into Sanskrit and their main canonical Abhidharma text was composed, the MahÃÂvibhaá¹£a.
Scholars at present have "a nearly complete collection of sà «tras from the SarvÃÂstivÃÂda school" thanks to a recent discovery in Afghanistan of roughly two-thirds of Dërgha ÃÂgama in Sanskrit." The Madhyama ÃÂgama (Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka no. 26) was translated by Gautama Saá¹Âghadeva, and is available in Chinese translation as part of the Chinese canon. The Saá¹Âyukta ÃÂgama (Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka no. 99) translated by Guá¹Âabhadra, is also available in Chinese translation. The SarvÃÂstivÃÂda is therefore the only early school besides the Theravada for which we have substantial number of sutras. The SÃÂrvÃÂstivÃÂda Vinaya Piá¹Âaka is also extant in Chinese translation, as are the seven books of the SarvÃÂstivÃÂda Abhidharma Piá¹Âaka, including the Abhidharma MahÃÂvibhÃÂá¹£a à ÂÃÂstra (Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka 1545), which was the main canonical Abhiodharma text of the VaibhÃÂá¹£ika SarvÃÂstivÃÂdins of northwest India.
Portions of the Mà «lasÃÂrvÃÂstivÃÂda Tripiá¹Âaka survive in Tibetan translation and Nepalese manuscripts. The relationship of the Mà «lasÃÂrvÃÂstivÃÂda school to SarvÃÂstivÃÂda school is indeterminate; their vinayas certainly differed but it is not clear that their Sà «tra Piá¹Âaka did. The Gilgit manuscripts may contain ÃÂgamas from the Mà «lasÃÂrvÃÂstivÃÂda school in Sanskrit. The Mà «lasÃÂrvÃÂstivÃÂda Vinaya Piá¹Âaka survives in Tibetan translation and also in Chinese translation (Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka 1442). The Gilgit manuscripts also contain vinaya texts from the Mà «lasÃÂrvÃÂstivÃÂda school in Sanskrit.
The PÃÂli Canon is the complete Tripiá¹Âaka set maintained by the TheravÃÂda tradition as written and preserved in Pali.
The dating of the Tripiá¹Âaka is unclear. Max Müller states that the current structure and contents of the Pali Canon took shape in the 3rd century BCE after which it continued to be transmitted orally from generation to generation until finally being put into written form in the 1st century BCE (nearly 500 years after the lifetime of Buddha).
The Theravada chronicle called the Dipavamsa states that during the reign of Valagamba of Anuradhapura (29âÂÂ17 BCE) the monks who had previously remembered the Tipiá¹Âaka and its commentary orally now wrote them down in books, because of the threat posed by famine and war. The Mahavamsa also refers briefly to the writing down of the canon and the commentaries at this time. According to Sri Lankan sources more than 1000 monks who had attained Arahantship were involved in the task. The place where the project was undertaken was in Aluvihare, Matale, Sri Lanka. The resulting texts were later partly translated into a number of East Asian languages such as Chinese, Tibetan and Mongolian by ancient visiting scholars, which though extensive are incomplete.
Each Buddhist sub-tradition had its own Tripiá¹Âaka for its monasteries, written by its sangha, each set consisting of 32 books, in three parts or baskets of teachings: (âÂÂBasket of DisciplineâÂÂ), (âÂÂBasket of DiscourseâÂÂ), and Abhidhamma Piá¹Âaka (âÂÂBasket of Special [or Further] DoctrineâÂÂ). The structure, the code of conduct and moral virtues in the Vinaya basket particularly, have similarities to some of the surviving Dharmasutra texts of Hinduism.
Much of the surviving Tripiá¹Âaka literature is in Pali, with some in Sanskrit as well as other local Asian languages. The Pali Canon does not contain the Mahayana Sutras and Tantras as Mahayana schools were not influential in Theravada tradition as in East Asia and Tibet. Hence, there is no major Mahayana (neither Hinayana or Pratyekabuddhayana) schools in Theravada tradition. The Tantric schools of Theravada tradition use Tantric texts independently, and not as the part of the Collection.
Some of the well known preserved Pali Canons are the Chattha Sangayana Tipitaka, Buddha Jayanthi Tripitaka, Thai Tipitaka, etc.
The Chinese Buddhist Canon is the Tripiá¹Âaka collection maintained by the East Asian Buddhist tradition. This canon contains texts translated from various Indian languages (such as Sanskrit and Gandhari prakrit) into Buddhist Chinese, a form of traditional literary Chinese. The traditional term for the canon is "Great Storage of Scriptures" ().
Wu and Chia state that emerging evidence, though uncertain, suggests that the earliest written Buddhist Tripiá¹Âaka texts may have arrived in China from India by the 1st century BCE. An organised collection of Buddhist texts began to emerge in the 6th century CE, based on the structure of early bibliographies of Buddhist texts. However, it was the 'Kaiyuan Era Catalogue' by Zhisheng in 730 that provided the lasting structure. Zhisheng introduced the basic six-fold division with two sets of sutra, vinaya, and abhidharma works classified as MahÃÂyÃÂna and HënayÃÂna. It is likely that Zhisheng's catalogue proved decisive because it was used to reconstruct the Canon after the persecutions of 845 CE; however, it was also considered a "perfect synthesis of the entire four-hundred-year development of a proper Chinese form of the Canon."
One of the most well known preserved edition of the Chinese Canon is the woodblock edition of the Tripitaka Koreana. These woodblocks became the basis for the modern edition of the Japanese Taishà  Tripiá¹Âaka, the most widely used and digitized edition for modern scholarship. The Taishà  Daizà Âkyà  is the standard modern edition as systematized by Japanese scholars, published in Japan from 1924 to 1929.
While still referred to by the traditional term "Tripiá¹Âaka", it is actually divided into many more textual categories, including: ÃÂgamas (equivalent to NikÃÂyas), JÃÂtakas, MahÃÂyÃÂna Sà «tras, Esoteric texts, Vinaya, Sutra Commentaries, Abhidharma, Mahayana à ÂÃÂstras (âÂÂTreatisesâÂÂ), Chinese commentaries, Chinese Treatises, Histories and biographies.
In the modern era, the Chinese Buddhist Canon was translated in full into modern Korean. It was also fully translated into Japanese by Japanese scholars. While many texts have also been translated into English, many others remain untranslated.
The Tibetan Buddhist canon is a collection of sacred texts recognized by various sects of Tibetan Buddhism. In addition to sutrayana texts, the Tibetan canon includes tantric texts. The Tibetan Canon underwent a final compilation in the 14th century by Buton Rinchen Drub.
The Tibetan Canon has its own scheme which divided texts into two broad categories:
There many editions of the Tibetan Canon, some of the major editions include the Derge edition, the Lhasa edition, the Peking edition and the Jiang edition.
The Tibetan Kangyur and Tengyur were also translated into Classical Mongolian, and these texts compose the Mongolian Buddhist Canon.
The Mongolian Buddhist Canon is a corpus of classical Mongolian Buddhist translations central to the Buddhist tradition in Mongolia. It is mostly based on the Tibetan Buddhist canon but also contains texts not found in the standard Tibetan canon collections. Like the Tibetan canon, the Mongolian canon consists of two major divisions: the Kanjur (translated words of the Buddha) and the Tenjur (commentaries and treatises by Indian and Tibetan masters). Tibetan texts were translated into classical Mongolian from Tibetan beginning in the Yuan dynasty. But the translation of the canon was not finished until the 17th century, when Ligdan Khan and the Gelug school of Tibetan Buddhism in Mongolia, led by leader Zanabazar, supervised a translation project. The Mongolian canon was fully completed when the Chinese Qianlong Emperor (1711âÂÂ99), the fifth Emperor of the Qing dynasty (1636âÂÂ1912), supervised a grand project to finish translating and then to print the Mongolian canon (with woodblock printing technology).
The Newar Buddhist tradition of Nepal has preserved many Buddhist texts in Sanskrit. The Nepalese Buddhist textual tradition is a unique collection of Buddhist texts preserved primarily in Nepal, particularly within the Newar Buddhist community of the Kathmandu Valley. It is distinct for its emphasis on preserving the Sanskrit originals of many Mahayana and Vajrayana scriptures, which have otherwise been lost in India and survived only in translations in regions like Tibet and China. The Newars have continued to copy Sanskrit manuscripts up to the present day.
The Kathmandu Valley has long been a center for Buddhist scholarship, particularly following the destruction of Indian monasteries after the 12th-century Muslim conquests. Tibetan scholars often visited to acquire texts, and local Newar Buddhists, including householder clergy (à ÂÃÂkyabhiká¹£us and vajrÃÂcÃÂryas), were proficient in Sanskrit, making it a significant language for Buddhist scholarship in the region. From the 19th century onwards, Sanskrit manuscripts from Nepal were collected and sent to academic institutions in Calcutta and Europe by figures like Brian H. Hodgson, contributing to modern Buddhist studies. However, the focus of modern Newar Buddhist literature was largely on local compositions in the Newari vernacular, reflecting the distinct practices of Newar Buddhism. Newar texts often used bilingual formats, integrating Sanskrit and Newari, and employed diverse calligraphic scripts like NewàLipi and Rañjana.
A recent digital humanities project is compiling a Sanskrit Buddhist canon based on surviving Sanskrit Buddhist literature. The University of the West, in collaboration with the Nagarjuna Institute in Kathmandu, Nepal, has worked to digitize and distribute Sanskrit scriptures into the Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon (DSBC) project. The scope of the DSBC project is vast, encompassing the digitization of at least 600 Mahayana Buddhist sutras that have survived in Sanskrit. As of now, the DSBC has successfully digitized over 604 texts, equating to roughly 50,000 pages, with more than 369 scriptures available on its official website. The collection continues to expand as additional texts are digitized and made accessible to the public.
The Chinese form of , "sÃÂnzàng" (ä¸ÂèÂÂ), was sometimes used as an honorary title for a Buddhist monk who has mastered the teachings of the Tripiá¹Âaka. In Chinese culture, this is notable in the case of the Tang Dynasty monk Xuanzang, whose pilgrimage to India to study and bring Buddhist texts back to China was portrayed in the novel Journey to the West as "Tang Sanzang" (Tang Dynasty Tripiá¹Âaka Master). Due to the popularity of the novel, the term "sÃÂnzàng" is often erroneously understood as a name of the monk Xuanzang. One such screen version of this is the popular 1979 Monkey (TV series).
The modern Indian scholar Rahul Sankrityayan is sometimes referred to as Tripiá¹Âakacharya in reflection of his familiarity with the .
Pali Canon:
Myanmar Version of Buddhist Canon (6th revision):
Chinese Buddhist Canon:
Tibetan tradition:
Tripiá¹Âaka collections:
Sri Lankan version of Tipiá¹Âaka: