Buddhism before Theravada

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Buddhism before Theravada

Post by danieLion »

Sylvester wrote:Hi Dave

I should explain my resort to AN 2.126 against a liberal reading of AN 3.65.

It would be a "gamble", if we discounted the voice of another as a necessary condition. I take the more conservative reading of the meaning of "condition" (paccaya) in AN 2.126 to mean a necessary condition, rather than a sufficient condition, for Stream Entry. As a necessary condition, the presence of the Buddha's voice is no guarantee that the auditor would make the breakthrough to the Dhamma.
The suttas qualify as a voice/voices of another/others, right?
Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: Buddhism before Theravada

Post by Sylvester »

danieLion wrote:
Sylvester wrote:Hi Dave

I should explain my resort to AN 2.126 against a liberal reading of AN 3.65.

It would be a "gamble", if we discounted the voice of another as a necessary condition. I take the more conservative reading of the meaning of "condition" (paccaya) in AN 2.126 to mean a necessary condition, rather than a sufficient condition, for Stream Entry. As a necessary condition, the presence of the Buddha's voice is no guarantee that the auditor would make the breakthrough to the Dhamma.
The suttas qualify as a voice/voices of another/others, right?

Yes, I believe so.
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Buddhism before Theravada

Post by danieLion »

Sylvester wrote:
danieLion wrote:
Sylvester wrote:Hi Dave

I should explain my resort to AN 2.126 against a liberal reading of AN 3.65.

It would be a "gamble", if we discounted the voice of another as a necessary condition. I take the more conservative reading of the meaning of "condition" (paccaya) in AN 2.126 to mean a necessary condition, rather than a sufficient condition, for Stream Entry. As a necessary condition, the presence of the Buddha's voice is no guarantee that the auditor would make the breakthrough to the Dhamma.
The suttas qualify as a voice/voices of another/others, right?

Yes, I believe so.
Then I think we're of one accord--or close enough.
User avatar
Sekha
Posts: 789
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:32 am
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Buddhism before Theravada

Post by Sekha »

danieLion wrote:"In early Buddhist mediation theory, faith," he says, "is not what's required to overcome doubt, but rather investigation" (41:07-41:23).
:thumbsup:

Unfortunately, even some very highly developed meditation teachers don't seem to have understood this. Fortunately, some others did.
Where knowledge ends, religion begins. - B. Disraeli

http://www.buddha-vacana.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Post Reply