How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhism

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
User avatar
Kumara
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:14 am
Contact:

Re: How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhis

Post by Kumara »

Qianxi wrote:
Spiny Norman wrote:
Kumara wrote: This is helpful as a guide: http://www.dhammaforeveryone.com/is-the ... avada.html
I noticed this as one of the criteria in the guide:
What is mythological, magical and almost superstitious is later development since the philosophy of the commonly agreed texts as early teachings is non-magical and free of mythology.

Is this intended to include sutta content relating to rebirth and kamma? And who has "commonly agreed" that certain texts are early?
What can be talked about with some clarity is the (considerable) shared material between the various versions of the four Agamas. That is what Analayo means when he refers to early buddhism. In that layer there are plenty of references to things we might consider mythical or magical. Almost all of the content of the pali Nikayas is also found in the Chinese agamas, so devas, teleportation, psychic powers etc. are all part of what Analayo refers to as 'Early Buddhism'.

As time goes on there's a tendency to elaborate accounts of the Buddha's powers, but things we might consider magical or mythological were there 'from the beginning' (or as far back as it is possible to go).

I think the criterion you quote draws into question the reliability of the article.
Actually we don't know what the write meant by "What is mythological, magical and almost superstitious". Maybe those stranger stuff in DN.

Anyway, looks like this thread is already derailed before anything I was hoping for show up.

To give an example:
Orthodox Theravada: No intermediate being.
Early Buddhism: Highly suggestive of intermediate being.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17188
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhis

Post by DNS »

Kumara wrote: Anyway, looks like this thread is already derailed before anything I was hoping for show up.
To give an example:
Orthodox Theravada: No intermediate being.
Early Buddhism: Highly suggestive of intermediate being.
Orthodox Theravada includes the 5 Nikayas and Patimokkha so I don't think you are going to find many deviations from what we know of early Buddhism even though they have included some later works such as some of the books of the KN, the Abhidhamma and later commentaries.

In the example you put above, Bhikkhu Bodhi has suggested that early Buddhism may have included an intermediate being. From the Metta Sutta:

'bhuutaa vaa sambhavesii vaa' -- "to beings who have come to be and those about to come to be."

Another possible example is the greater emphasis on last thought moment in the Abhidhamma and later works, absent from the Nikayas. But other than these 2 things, I can't think of any significant deviations from early Buddhism right now.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17188
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhis

Post by DNS »

David N. Snyder wrote: Another possible example is the greater emphasis on last thought moment in the Abhidhamma and later works, absent from the Nikayas. But other than these 2 things, I can't think of any significant deviations from early Buddhism right now.
Actually, I forgot about the case of Sarkani. Shortly after the death of a lay person named Sarakani, the Buddha identified him as a stream-entrant. Then some monks complained that Sarakani could not have been a stream-entrant as this lay person indulged in alcohol. But the Buddha remarked that, "Sarakani the Sakyan undertook the training at the time of his death." Samyutta Nikaya 55.24

So there could be some role of the last thought moment and some evidence for it in the SN.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhis

Post by daverupa »

Worth considering:

A) Vegetarianism v. alms-neutrality
B) Sending merit or receiving it from another; merit as currency v. lack of this ideation
C) Buddha-rupas v. aniconism
D) Ritual chants, protections, and charms v. lack of this ideation
E) The presence of the Vsm v. lack of this ideation
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6594
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: USA

Re: How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhis

Post by Mkoll »

daverupa wrote:Worth considering:

A) Vegetarianism v. alms-neutrality
B) Sending merit or receiving it from another; merit as currency v. lack of this ideation
C) Buddha-rupas v. aniconism
D) Ritual chants, protections, and charms v. lack of this ideation
E) The presence of the Vsm v. lack of this ideation
A) Alms-neutrality almost certainly - wandering monks wouldn't have much choice in traveling between sizable settlements; it also just doesn't make sense to have monks who are training for dispassion to be picky about food and that reminds me of the sutta about being content with any old robe, almsfood, medicine, etc.

B) Lack of this ideation almost certainly - it's barely mentioned at all in the Nikayas and I don't think the commentaries even developed it to the extent it was developed in Mahayana; also beings are heir to their kamma, owners of their kamma, etc.

C) Stupas popped up not long after the Buddha's death and there is some mention of them in the Nikayas; however they're never connected with the practice of Dhamma per se AFAIK

D) This one is tricky as there are a few chants and protections in the Nikayas (Ahina Sutta and Metta Sutta come to mind)... :shrug:

E) What's Vsm? Visuddhimagga?
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 6492
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Mae Wang Huai Rin, Li District, Lamphun

Re: Differences between Theravada and Early Buddhism

Post by Dhammanando »

chownah wrote:You have presented many articles which talked about stories about purported rebirths and about people speculating that some phenomena could be from rebirth but you have never produced a scientific study much less a rigourous scientific study.

I think you may be confusing Ven. Kumāra with another poster, Kusala. It's the latter who likes to post Ian Stevenson-type stuff.
Yena yena hi maññanti,
tato taṃ hoti aññathā.


In whatever way they conceive it,
It turns out otherwise.
(Sn. 588)
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Differences between Theravada and Early Buddhism

Post by chownah »

Dhammanando wrote:
chownah wrote:You have presented many articles which talked about stories about purported rebirths and about people speculating that some phenomena could be from rebirth but you have never produced a scientific study much less a rigourous scientific study.

I think you may be confusing Ven. Kumāra with another poster, Kusala. It's the latter who likes to post Ian Stevenson-type stuff.
Indeed you are correct. Thank you for pointing that out.
chownah

Ven. Kumara,
Please accept my apologies for having mistaken you for another poster and for having attributed their actions to you. I have never seen a scientific study done of any aspect of rebirth and in fact I find it difficult to think of how such a study could be conducted. There are some collections of stories purported to be a study of rebirth but there is always an assumption that rebirth is the explanation for the stories and no evidence or explanation to indicate that rebirth is in fact the cause....for example it could be caused by ghosts.... I am not suggesting that ghosts are the answer nor am I suggesting that rebirth is the answer....I am suggesting that scientific studies will include some attempt at suggesting all possible causes and determining which cause is more likely.
chownah
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhis

Post by daverupa »

Mkoll wrote:E) What's Vsm? Visuddhimagga?
Yes.

With respect to aniconism, stupas count, as do footprints and wheels and such. These are all quite early; the Buddha-rupa is a much later device.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
Kumara
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:14 am
Contact:

Re: How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhis

Post by Kumara »

daverupa wrote:Worth considering:

A) Vegetarianism v. alms-neutrality
B) Sending merit or receiving it from another; merit as currency v. lack of this ideation
C) Buddha-rupas v. aniconism
D) Ritual chants, protections, and charms v. lack of this ideation
E) The presence of the Vsm v. lack of this ideation
Alright! Very much the sort of things I was looking for. Thanks.

On A, you observe that vegetarianism is common in orthodox Theravada now?

On E, care to elaborate a little?
Last edited by Kumara on Thu Dec 04, 2014 10:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Kumara
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:14 am
Contact:

Re: Differences between Theravada and Early Buddhism

Post by Kumara »

chownah wrote:Ven. Kumara,
Please accept my apologies for having mistaken you for another poster and for having attributed their actions to you.
It's ok. I've been accused of worse things. :-)
Besides, I've learnt not to get offended when I hear something not true about me. If I know it isn't true, what's there to be offended about? When I myself believe something about what's said, now that's where the offense happens. Still working on that propensity.
I have never seen a scientific study done of any aspect of rebirth and in fact I find it difficult to think of how such a study could be conducted. There are some collections of stories purported to be a study of rebirth but there is always an assumption that rebirth is the explanation for the stories and no evidence or explanation to indicate that rebirth is in fact the cause
I suppose that's why Ian Stevenson use the word "suggestive". He's a real scientist.
....for example it could be caused by ghosts.... I am not suggesting that ghosts are the answer nor am I suggesting that rebirth is the answer....I am suggesting that scientific studies will include some attempt at suggesting all possible causes and determining which cause is more likely.
I suppose the problem is scientists usually don't factor in ghosts... Haha!
Last edited by Kumara on Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhis

Post by daverupa »

Kumara wrote:On A, you observe that vegetarianism is common in orthodox Theravada now?
My experience is with Theravada in the Western US and a few weeks down at Santi Forest Monastery in Australia. I notice that vegetarianism is something the laity strive for more often than not; it's a topic of conversation more when it isn't happening than when it is, and there seems to be a common attitude that meat-eating should not occur, rather than simply not be sought out.
On E, care to elaborate a little?
The Vsm looks like a Theravada Digest to me, probably the sort of work every school had; the Vimuttimagga may have influenced Buddhaghosa, showing perhaps the slow growth of this sort of manual within the Sangha. In any event, it's Buddhism with Theravada as an underlying assumption, where most of the Nikayas/Agamas, while reflecting some scholastic emphases, are mostly free of this sort of thing.

(Perhaps the satipatthana & anapanasati suttas/pericopes are proto-vimuttimaggas?)
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
Kumara
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:14 am
Contact:

Re: How Modern Orthodox Theravada Deviate from Early Buddhis

Post by Kumara »

daverupa wrote:
Kumara wrote:On A, you observe that vegetarianism is common in orthodox Theravada now?
My experience is with Theravada in the Western US and a few weeks down at Santi Forest Monastery in Australia. I notice that vegetarianism is something the laity strive for more often than not; it's a topic of conversation more when it isn't happening than when it is, and there seems to be a common attitude that meat-eating should not occur, rather than simply not be sought out.
I see. So vegetarianism is becoming orthodox in the West. It's true is some Asian Theravadin circles too, but not yet orthodox.
On E, care to elaborate a little?
The Vsm looks like a Theravada Digest to me, probably the sort of work every school had; the Vimuttimagga may have influenced Buddhaghosa, showing perhaps the slow growth of this sort of manual within the Sangha. In any event, it's Buddhism with Theravada as an underlying assumption, where most of the Nikayas/Agamas, while reflecting some scholastic emphases, are mostly free of this sort of thing.
Thanks.
(Perhaps the satipatthana & anapanasati suttas/pericopes are proto-vimuttimaggas?)
Could be.
User avatar
Kumara
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:14 am
Contact:

Re: Differences between Theravada and Early Buddhism

Post by Kumara »

Kumara wrote:
David N. Snyder wrote:
Kumara wrote:I wanted to say "original" instead of "early", but we can't know the original Buddhism, can we?
http://www.originalbuddhism.com

Or alternatively:

http://www.originalbuddhism.org

I couldn't resist getting those domain names when they became available a few years ago for reasonable price. :mrgreen:
"Modern Theravada" is "original Buddhism"? Gaaa....
Maybe fair to say that Modern Theravada attempts to revive original Buddhism.
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Differences between Theravada and Early Buddhism

Post by Kim OHara »

Kumara wrote:Maybe fair to say that Modern Theravada attempts to revive original Buddhism.
Hmm ... maybe fairer to say that Modern Western Theravada attempts to create an "original Buddhism" which is not inconsistent with Western scientific rationalism.

:thinking:
Kim
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10167
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Differences between Theravada and Early Buddhism

Post by Spiny Norman »

Kim OHara wrote:
Kumara wrote:Maybe fair to say that Modern Theravada attempts to revive original Buddhism.
Hmm ... maybe fairer to say that Modern Western Theravada attempts to create an "original Buddhism" which is not inconsistent with Western scientific rationalism.
:thinking:
Kim
Possibly, though we then have the problem of trying to define "modern western Theravada", as well as trying to define "early Buddhism" and "original Buddhism".... :juggling: :thinking:
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Post Reply