1. What are the three main divisions of the Pali Cannon?
2. How many pages are in the Pali Cannon?
3. In your opinion, does it matter whether the Buddha actually spoke the words making up the text of "Original Buddhism?" How accurate is accurate?
1. Pali Canon, or the Tipitaka (the three baskets) comprises the Vinaya Pitaka, the Sutta Pitaka, and the Abhidhamma Pitaka (Pali).
2. Approximately 20,000 pages.
3. In my opinion it does not matter whether it is provable or not that the texts were actually spoken by the historical figure of Shakyamuni Buddha or not. To become fixated over such an issue is to miss the point of the teachings. The essential issue is whether the teachings are logical and make sense. One of the glories of Buddhism is that it does not demand blind faith, and indeed Budhdists are happy to embrace the pure teachings of other faiths as well. Even His Holiness the Dalai Lama once told western converts that it would be better for them to remain within their own western traditions (e.g. Christianity): "better to be a good Christian than a bad Buddhist".
Regarding "how accurate is accurate" - it all depends on one's own standpoint and the start point. Different scholars interpret words slightly differently, although I am aware that a huge effort is made to study the original Pali texts in order to find the most appropriate translation of each word. An example of this is the fabulous work undertaken by the Pali Text Society. We should be aware of course that language itself changes over time, so the meaning of a particular word might be clear to someone in one century, or indeed in one geographical location, but the same word might have a different connotation to someone in a different place or time, even though apparently speaking the same language. One need only look at different meanings attached to words today in England and the USA - some have very different connotations! I am aware, for example, of current deep and emotional arguments within the International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) arguments over their beautiful library of Vedic books and what their founder, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada said in his taped recordings of translations of the books, and this was only 30 or 40 years ago. If such arguments over accuracy can be so strong with teachings which were electronically recorded and within the lifetime of those now disagreeing, why should we think that something which may or may not have been spoken 2500 years ago could be 100% word for word "accurate" - whatever that even means. So, what is accurate? Surely the important issue is that the "meaning" is correct - the lesson, the teaching…that is important.
M D Vickers
Taiwan