The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 5 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Remembering Sue Hamilton (1950–2016)
Open accessAbstract
I recently learned that Sue Hamilton had died after a long illness in 2016.Her work on understanding early Buddhism has been an inspiration and driving force for my own studies for many years.As far as I can see, her death went unremarked in Buddhist Studies and there are no formal obituaries or memorials celebrating her contribution to the field.I want to correct this oversight, record the basic facts of her life, and convey enough of her insights to make her work accessible to new generations of Buddhist Studies scholars who will be much the poorer if they overlook her.Sue Hamilton was a remarkable scholar who discovered a new and invaluable way of thinking about Buddhism.This has not happened often in history and certainly not in the history of academic Buddhist Studies, which tends to begin with existing, emic, accounts of Buddhism.Hamilton's academic mentor, Richard Gombrich (2009, ix), refers to his "enormous intellectual debt" to Hamilton's "demonstration that the Buddha is always talking about experience."It is rare, in my experience, for a student to become a major influence on their teacher.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 5 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Premisenone given§ Abstract
The Ariyapariyesanā Sutta shows the Buddha learning these techniques from the non-Buddhist gurus, Āḷāra the Kālāma and Uddaka, son of Rāma.
“The Ariyapariyesanā shows the Buddha learning exactly these techniques from the non-Buddhist gurus, Āḷāra the Kālāma and Uddaka, son of Rāma.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning§ Abstract
This way of thinking about Buddhism was prevalent, if not necessarily mainstream, amongst the Buddhists who created the Sutta-piṭaka.
“When one reads Hamilton's sources and considers them in the light of her analysis, it becomes apparent that this way of thinking about Buddhism was prevalent, if not necessarily mainstream, amongst the Buddhists who created the Sutta-piṭaka.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationcitation§ Abstract
The famous negations of Buddhist categories in the Heart Sūtra are not metaphysical.
“As Huifeng said, this discovery means that the famous negations of Buddhist categories (skandha, āyatana, dhātu, nidāna, āryasatya, āryapudgala) are not metaphysical.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Huifeng (2014)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning§ Abstract
Hamilton has given us a new approach to Buddhism in general, not merely to early Buddhism.
“Given the applicability to radically different domains of Buddhist thought, we can say that far from merely being a new approach to early Buddhism, Hamilton has given us a new approach to Buddhism in general.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Premisecitation§ Abstract
Hamilton showed that received explanations of khandha and anattā were substantially different from, and less coherent than, the explanations found in Pāli suttas.
“She also showed that received explanations of khandha and anattā were substantially different from, and less coherent than, the explanations found in Pāli suttas.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Hamilton 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Interpretationreasoning§ Abstract
The existence of this state of contentless awareness helps explain why the focus of early Buddhism is epistemic rather than metaphysical.
“The existence of this state of contentless awareness helps to explain why the focus of early Buddhism is epistemic rather than metaphysical.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
- Probably not a substantial claim. 9
- It may state two separate claims as one. 3
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ AbstractPrajñāpāramitā is not a schismatic or radically new idea, but a new literary genre for talking about an old approach to Buddhist practice that goes back as far back in time as Buddhist texts allow us to see.
“I now see Prajñāpāramitā not as a schismatic or radically new idea, but as a new literary genre for talking about an old approach to Buddhist practice that goes back as far back in time as Buddhist texts allow us to see.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Interpretationreasoning§ AbstractHamilton's epistemic reading of Pāli texts applies equally to Prajñāpāramitā.
“Hamilton's epistemic reading of Pāli texts seems to me to apply equally to Prajñāpāramitā, one of the earliest genres of Mahāyāna text.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationnone given§ AbstractThe ability of Indian religieux to temporarily end sensory experience at will, and the absence of such techniques in Europe, provides the key difference between Indian and Greek philosophy in antiquity.
“It is the ability of Indian religieux to temporarily end sensory experience at will, and the absence of such techniques in Europe, that provides the key difference between Indian and Greek philosophy in antiquity.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
Premisecitation§ AbstractIf we want to understand anything about ourselves, we must start with our khandhas, our experiencing apparatus.
“If we want to understand anything about ourselves at all, then, it is with our khandhas-our experiencing apparatus-that we need to start”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Hamilton 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim.
Premisecitation§ AbstractThe terms dukkha, loka, and khandha together refer to the way one's experience, whose apparatus is one's khandhas, is one's world.
“all three terms refer in effect to the way one's experience (dukkha), the apparatus of which is one's khandhas, is one's world (loka)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Hamilton 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim.
Premisecitation§ AbstractAnālayo (2021) has noted that if we take the biographical story in the Ariyapariyesanā Sutta seriously, then this approach to meditation seems to predate Buddhism.
“Anālayo (2021) has noted that if we take the biographical story in the Ariyapariyesanā Sutta seriously then this approach to meditation seems to predate Buddhism.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Anālayo (2021)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Rests on an assumption: The Ariyapariyesanā Sutta's biographical story is historically reliable enough to indicate that this approach to meditation predates Buddhism.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
Interpretationreasoning§ AbstractThere is no good way to square a karma-based morality with the idea of no personal continuity.
“There is no good way to square a karma-based morality with the idea of no personal continuity.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationreasoning§ AbstractHamilton developed a new approach to thinking about Buddhism, which the author considers invaluable.
“Sue Hamilton was a remarkable scholar who discovered a new and invaluable way of thinking about Buddhism.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Hamilton has given us a new approach to Buddhism in general.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Interpretationnone given§ AbstractBy practising nonapprehension of sensory experience, one can make sensory experience stop.
“By practising nonapprehension (anupalambhayogena) of sensory experience we can make it stop.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
The Pāli suttas accurately represent early Buddhist teachings.
“Her reading of the Pāli texts showed that dukkha is experience.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The doctrine of dependent arising requires that a condition be physically proximate to its effect.
“That is, a condition must be physically proximate to that which it conditions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The mind can only process one citta at a time.
“Buddhists generally believed that the mind can only process one citta at a time.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The doctrine of moments is the most broadly accepted way to reconcile karma with dependent arising.
“of which the doctrine of moments (khanavāda) is the most broadly accepted”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Ariyapariyesanā Sutta's biographical story is historically reliable enough to indicate that this approach to meditation predates Buddhism.
“if we take the biographical story in the Ariyapariyesanā Sutta seriously then this approach to meditation seems to predate Buddhism.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Conflicting publication years for Bronkhorst's review
MinorThe text cites Bronkhorst's review as a 2002 work, but its reference entry begins with 2004. The entry also ends with "(2002)," leaving its stated publication year inconsistent.
“Johannes Bronkhorst (2002) takes an even more adversarial approach”
“Bronkhorst, Johannes. 2004. "[Review of] Early Buddhism. A new approach. The I of the Beholder. Sue Hamilton." Buddhist Studies Review 19 (1): 76-79 (2002).”
Citations
Cites
The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Review of Anderson, Carol S. (1999). "Pain and its Ending: The Four Noble Truths in the Theravada Buddhist Canon." Religion 30(4): 411-413.
- Edited volumes 1997. Indian Insights: Buddhism, Brahmanism and Bhakti. Papers from the Annual Spalding Symposium on Indian Religions. Edited by Peter Connolly and Sue Hamilton. Bibliography Anālayo. 2021. "Being Mindful of What is Absent." Mindfulness 13: 1671-1678.
- Attwood, Jayarava. 2015. "Heart Murmurs: Some Problems with Conze's Prajñāpāramitāhṛdaya." Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies, 8: 28-48.
- ---. 2021. "The Chinese Origins of the Heart Sutra Revisited: A Comparative Analysis of the Chinese and Sanskrit Texts." Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies. 44: 13-52. https://doi.org/10.2143/JIABS.44.0.3290289 · DOI
- ---. 2022. "The Cessation of Sensory Experience and Prajñāpāramitā Philosophy." Inter- national Journal of Buddhist Thought & Culture 32(1): 111-148.
- Gethin, Rupert. 1986. "The Five Khandhas: Their Treatment In The Nikāyas And Early Abhidhamma." Journal Of Indian Philosophy 14(1): 35-53.
- Huifeng. 2014. "Apocryphal Treatment for Conze's Heart Problems: Non-attainment, Appre- hension, and Mental Hanging in the Prajñāpāramitā Hṛdaya." Journal of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies 6: 72-105.
- Killingley, Dermot. 2004. [Review: Early Buddhism: A New Approach. The I of the Beholder by Sue Hamilton]. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 14(3): 276-277.
Metadata
- Authors
- Attwood, J.
- Affiliations
- Independent Scholar
- Corresponding author
- Attwood, Jayarava
- ORCID
- Attwood, Jayarava
- Venue
- Buddhist Studies Review
- Publisher
- Equinox Publishing
- Published
- 2025-11-18
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 2-11
- ISSN
- 0265-2897 (ISSN-L)
- 1747-9681
- OpenAlex
- W4416408186
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Buddhist Studies Review (publishedVersion)
- PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Cambridge
- King's College London
- Girton College, University of Cambridge
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Indian and Buddhist Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Biographical and Historical Analysis
- Keywords
- early Buddhism, academic mentorship
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-05, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-05 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
