নিদ্দেছ

নিদ্দেছ (সংক্ষিপ্তভাৱে, "নিদ্দ") হৈছে থেৰবাদ বৌদ্ধ ধৰ্মৰ পালি ধৰ্মশাস্ত্ৰৰ অংশ, বৌদ্ধ ধৰ্মগ্ৰন্থ। সুত্ত পিটকৰ খুদ্দাকা নিকায়ত ইয়াৰ অন্তৰ্ভূক্ত। ই সুত্তনীপতৰ কিছু অংশৰ টীকা ৰূপত। পৰম্পৰাগত উদাহৰণসমূহত ইয়াক বুদ্ধৰ শিষ্য সৰীপুত্তৰ বুলি কোৱা হয়। ইয়াক দুটা ভাগত ভাগ কৰা হৈছে:

মহা নিদ্দেছ (mahā-) (সংক্ষিপ্ত ৰূপ, "Nidd I" বা "Nd1"), আট্ঠাক বগ্গাৰ ওপৰত টীকা ("Octet Chapter," Sn 4);
কুল্লা বা কুলা নিদ্দেছ (cūḷa-) (সংক্ষিপ্তভাৱে, "Nidd II" বা "Nd2"), পৰায়ণ বাগ্গা ("দূৰ তীৰ অধ্যায়লৈ যোৱাৰ পথ,"Sn 5) আৰু খগ্গভিছানা সুত্ত ("Rhinoceros Horn Discourse," Sn 1.3)ৰ ওপৰত টীকা।

এই গ্ৰন্থখন খ্ৰীষ্টপূৰ্ব ১ম শতিকাৰ পিছত ৰচনা হোৱা বুলি বিশ্বাস কৰা হয়।^[1]

উৎস

Hinüber, Oskar von (2000). A Handbook of Pāli Literature. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. আই.এচ.বি.এন. 3-11-016738-7.
De la Vallee Poussin, L., Thomas, E.J., ed. (1916), "Niddesa I, Mahaniddesa", Vol. 1, The Pali Text Society, London, Oxford University Press. (Pali edition)
De la Vallee Poussin, L., Thomas, E.J., ed. (1917), "Niddesa I, Mahaniddesa", Vol. 2, The Pali Text Society, London, Oxford University Press. (Pali edition)
De la Vallee Poussin, L., Thomas, E.J., ed. (1916), "Niddesa II, Cullaniddesa", Vol. 3, The Pali Text Society, London, Oxford University Press. (Pali edition)

তথ্যসূত্ৰ

↑ Hinüber (2000), p. 59, para. 118, writes:
The age of Nidd has been discussed at great length by S.Lévi 1925, who arrives at a date in the 2nd century AD, arguing from the geographical horizon of the text. This date has been disputed recently by Norman 1983: 84,86, who argues in favour of a much earlier date at the time of Aśoka. The question needs reexamination. It is, however, certain that Nidd does not belong to the old canonical texts and that also a date after Aśoka does not seem likely.
In a related footnote (n. 204), Hinüber writes:
But "cannot be later than the date of the fixing of the canon", Norman:Sn-trsl II, p. XXVI: This means not later than the 1st century BC.

[1] Hinüber (2000), p. 59, para. 118, writes:
The age of Nidd has been discussed at great length by S.Lévi 1925, who arrives at a date in the 2nd century AD, arguing from the geographical horizon of the text. This date has been disputed recently by Norman 1983: 84,86, who argues in favour of a much earlier date at the time of Aśoka. The question needs reexamination. It is, however, certain that Nidd does not belong to the old canonical texts and that also a date after Aśoka does not seem likely.
In a related footnote (n. 204), Hinüber writes:
But "cannot be later than the date of the fixing of the canon", Norman:Sn-trsl II, p. XXVI: This means not later than the 1st century BC.

[1]