Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:07 pm

It has come to our attention that as of 28th January 2019 Original Buddhism is no longer 80% Therevada!

Supposedly due to recent developments in Buddhology(?) and according to "scholars" (Administrators of Dhammawheel.com)

Theravada has given up a whopping 20% of it's share in Original Buddhism! The 20% were divided between Pudgalavada. Mahasamghika, Mahayana and Chan.

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Original_Buddhism

Old rankings;
Image

Updated Rankings;
Image

What does the future hold for us, will Pudgalavada, Mahasamghika/Mahayana/Chan eventually overtake Theravada in our lifetimes according to Dr. Snyder?

How should we as Theravadins react to this?

How do you feel about people controlling Theravadin discourse making such rankings?

Let me know what you think!
Last edited by rightviewftw on Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 12416
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by DNS » Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:17 pm

Image

OMG! An independent thought and someone who examines scholarly research and is flexible in his thinking!?

What should we do?? Burn him at the stake?

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:20 pm

DNS wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:17 pm
OMG! An independent thought and someone who examines scholarly research and is flexible in his thinking!?

What should we do?? Burn him at the stake?
please keep calm and stay on topic

For me the biggest concern is non-theravadins controlling the Theravada discourse using ideology such as;
"democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch."

Wherein the fundamentalists (Theravadins) are the sheep obviously.

Especially this is a concern imo if these wolves are seen giving a platform and protection to revisionists who are promoting non-theravadin views in a Theravadin space.

I think that is a legitimate concern and these things do not end well as we have already seen with the e-sangha for example.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:32 pm, edited 8 times in total.

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 12416
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by DNS » Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:25 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:20 pm
DNS wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:17 pm
OMG! An independent thought and someone who examines scholarly research and is flexible in his thinking!?

What should we do?? Burn him at the stake?
please keep calm and stay on topic
I am calm, why would you think otherwise? I'm obviously joking around to your post.

I also own and maintain a Mahayana forum. I also own and run a pan-Dharmic religions forum. I also own and run an engaged Buddhism forum.

Dhamma Wiki also has a Dharma Wiki (note spelling) section with Mahayana articles; well duh, I'm non-sectarian, that is not news to anyone, except you, apparently. :D

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 12416
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by DNS » Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:32 pm

You do realize right in this thread, you edited your first post once and your second post 6 times so far?

OMG, such flexibility cannot be tolerated!
:rofl:

edit: second post now 7 times! :jumping:

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:35 pm

DNS wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:32 pm
You do realize right in this thread, you edited your first post once and your second post 6 times so far?

OMG, such flexibility cannot be tolerated!
:rofl:
Doctor Snyder, the editing is not a problem, you can in example edit your blog http://peacethroughwealth.com/ as much as you want but when you make a wiki page for Dhamma and are telling people what to think this is a legitimate concern for me as a disciple of the Buddha.

Perhaps you would like to tell us what made you downgrade Theravada?
Last edited by rightviewftw on Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 12416
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by DNS » Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:40 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:35 pm
Doctor Snyder, the editing is not a problem, you can in example edit your blog peacethruwealth.com as much as you want but when you make a wiki page for Dhamma and are telling people what to think this is a legitimate concern for me as a disciple of the Buddha.
I am not telling anyone what to think. You know how to check the revision history, so you can see this was from the beginning:
(author note: This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)
I am a non-sectarian, mostly Theravadin Buddhist. I have made no attempts to hide this and posted this article and it was discussed at all the DWs.

I have always had an admin here at DWT who did the vast bulk of the admin work and I don't get involved in most moderating issues due to this and to just be there for the final word, as needed. It is even more so the case at the other forums, where I have little to no admin involvement or decision making duties.

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:56 pm

DNS wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:40 pm
I have always had an admin here at DWT who did the vast bulk of the admin work and I don't get involved in most moderating issues due to this and to just be there for the final word, as needed. It is even more so the case at the other forums, where I have little to no admin involvement or decision making duties.
This is not a thread about you and i am not here to criticize your views.

You do have a passive role but in the end of the day you are the person who appoints the administrator and makes executive decisions.

I think two things are inappropriate on a Theravadin board;
1. Censoring fundamentalists
2. Not censoring revisionists

A revisionist is very different from an Analyst, the analysis is the tradition of the Theravada but a revisionist who rejects the fundamental tenets of the tradition should be censored for he is working on the outside of the tradition and is an outsider. I do not think DW admins are guilty of #1 but i do say they are guilty of #2.

That is my opinion.

User avatar
Lucas Oliveira
Posts: 846
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by Lucas Oliveira » Sun Feb 03, 2019 11:07 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:07 pm
It has come to our attention that as of 28th January 2019 Original Buddhism is no longer 80% Therevada!

Supposedly due to recent developments in Buddhology(?) and according to "scholars" (Administrators of Dhammawheel.com)

Theravada has given up a whopping 20% of it's share in Original Buddhism! The 20% were divided between Pudgalavada. Mahasamghika, Mahayana and Chan.

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Original_Buddhism

Old rankings;
Image

Updated Rankings;
Image

What does the future hold for us, will Pudgalavada, Mahasamghika/Mahayana/Chan eventually overtake Theravada in our lifetimes according to Dr. Snyder?

How should we as Theravadins react to this?

How do you feel about people controlling Theravadin discourse making such rankings?

Let me know what you think!
Thanks rightviewftw for the remarks!

Thanks David DNS for the searches!

:anjali:
I participate in this forum using Google Translator. http://translate.google.com.br

http://www.acessoaoinsight.net/

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by rightviewftw » Sun Feb 03, 2019 11:46 pm

Lucas Oliveira wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 11:07 pm
Thanks rightviewftw for the remarks!

Thanks David DNS for the searches!

:anjali:
You are welcome mate,
i don't advice following such a buffet approach to mixing doctrines because people can not really be "Mostly Theravadin".
For example if a person accepts these doctrines;
  • An impermanent self as taught by the Pudgalavada school and some Modern Theravada and Mahayana teachers accounting for karma, rebirth and in keeping with a teaching that is not nihilism.
One is not a Theravadin because Theravadin litterature rejects the notion of neither permanent nor impermanent self as taught by pudgalovada, this school is criticized in the Kathavatthu Book of Abhidhamma.
However he can still call himself; "Modern Theravadin" which is a new age, new school kind of Buddhist who bases his views on Sutta basically.

As for this view;
  • The idea of a (Ālāya-vijñāna) consciousness as a continuum, including a store-house consciousness
This can also be harshly criticized and is indefensible based on the Sutta imho.

I think that this "Modern Theravada" movement is a term for any kind of modern interpretation of Sutta Pitaka and is a very misleading term because anybody can come up with such an interpretation.

One thing is to reject some 5th century commentarial notion when comparing it to Sutta another thing completely is to claim "I am a 99% Theravadin but i believe in God Creator". The latter is simply not a Theravadin.

Some people say "i am orthodox Buddhist, i follow only Sutta and reject Abhidhamma" well what if Abhidhamma is in line with the Sutta and can not be disproven with the Sutta? In that case this person is teaching baloney and is rejecting a rational interpretation of the Sutta in favor of his own theories.

Beware of a buffet approach to mixing doctrines!

As doctor Snyder says
(author note: This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)
It is probably a very unpopular idea presented on his website and i would be surprised if it is one held by even 1% of Theravadin Scholars.

Unfortunately the Theravadin Tradition nowadays is a lot messed up and there are several of what is referred to as "factions" which hold contradictory views within it. It is pretty much beyond schism at this point because groups in this environment get away with pretty much any views.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 21404
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by retrofuturist » Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:08 am

Greetings Rightviewftw,

One position that your analysis seems to discount, is the possibility that some people are interested in the Buddha's own teachings (Buddha-vacana), and not necessarily the sectarian doctrines and interpretations that were established, reified, and in some cases ossified, in the centuries that followed.

These people are likely to take an interest in Theravāda Buddhism, since Theravāda is the only extant tradition that gives any priority whatsoever to the Sutta Pitaka, but they will not be beholden to Theravāda's sectarian interpretations of the Sutta Pitaka. This is especially so, since the commentarial tradition attempts to retrofit its own works (e.g. the Abhidhamma Pitaka) into its understandings of the Sutta Pitaka. We see this process explained by Bhikkhu Bodhi...
Bhikkhu Bodhi, in his refutation of Nanavira's Notes On Dhamma wrote:I am not saying that the detailed exposition of pa.ticca-samuppaada (PS) as found in the Pali Commentaries can in all particulars be traced back to the Suttas. The aim of the Commentaries, in their treatment of PS, is to correlate the Suttanta teaching of PS with the systematic analysis of phenomena and their conditional relations as found in the Abhidhamma. This results in an explanation of PS that is far more complex and technical than anything that can be drawn out from the Sutta texts themselves.

...

I also believe that the Commentaries take unnecessary risks when they try to read back into the Suttas ideas deriving from tools of interpretation that appeared perhaps centuries after the Suttas were compiled.
Despite your intolerance towards them, there are many Theravada Buddhists, monastic and lay, who do not take a fundamentalist approach to the commentarial/Mahavihara tradition. By all means, people are welcome to take such a strict Mahavihara/Theravada position when it comes to discussing the Dhamma at Dhamma Wheel, and we have created sub-forums (e.g. Classical Theravada, Abhidhamma) for such people to explore the Dhamma, without having to deal with other people challenging the basis for those views. But similarly, people are allowed to explore the Dhamma in a way that gives primacy to the Suttas, over the commentary. In fact, it is the commentarial tradition itself, which establishes that the Tipitaka is to be given primacy over the Commentary. That scheme priortises Dhamma sources as follows...
1. Sutta: the three baskets of the Tipiṭaka.
2. Suttānuloma: a direct inference from the Tipiṭaka.
3. Atthakathā: a commentary.
4. Attanomati: the personal opinions of later generations of teachers.
Thus, even according to the commentary, one can be Theravadin by relying on sutta and suttānuloma alone.

:buddha1:

A brief postscript, for your entertainment and edification...
SN 20.7: Ani Sutta wrote:Staying at Savatthi. "Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained. [1]

"In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.

"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.

"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves."

Note: 1. Ironically, the Commentary notes that the drum originally could be heard for twelve leagues, but in its final condition couldn't be heard even from behind a curtain.
Metta,
Paul. :)
"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"It is natural that one who knows and sees things as they really are is disenchanted and dispassionate." (AN 10.2)

“Truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.” (Flannery O'Connor)

User avatar
rightviewftw
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by rightviewftw » Mon Feb 04, 2019 1:09 am

retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:08 am
Greetings Rightviewftw,

One position that your analysis seems to discount, is the possibility that some people are interested in the Buddha's own teachings (Buddha-vacana), and not necessarily the sectarian doctrines and interpretations that were established, reified, and in some cases ossified, in the centuries that followed.
If you work from an assumption that Early Theravadins had it wrong and Abhidhamma is wrong then this makes sense, otherwise it does not hold true. Each to their own but i find it to be quite arrogant position. What can you or i possibly figure out that the Arahants during the first 500 years of the sasana could not figure out? Nothing.
retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:08 am
We see this process explained by Bhikkhu Bodhi...
Bhikkhu Bodhi, in his refutation of Nanavira's Notes On Dhamma wrote:I am not saying that the detailed exposition of pa.ticca-samuppaada (PS) as found in the Pali Commentaries can in all particulars be traced back to the Suttas. The aim of the Commentaries, in their treatment of PS, is to correlate the Suttanta teaching of PS with the systematic analysis of phenomena and their conditional relations as found in the Abhidhamma. This results in an explanation of PS that is far more complex and technical than anything that can be drawn out from the Sutta texts themselves.
I think Abhidhamma is not as creative of an explaination as people make it out to be. I would not call my self an expert of Abhidhamma but it seems simple enough and quite complementary. As for commentaries it is clearly a mixed bag and at times there are two mutually exclusive notions so those are not to be lumped together with the Abhidhamma.
retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:08 am
Despite your intolerance towards them, there are many Theravada Buddhists, monastic and lay, who do not take a fundamentalist approach to the commentarial/Mahavihara tradition. By all means, people are welcome to take such a strict Mahavihara/Theravada position when it comes to discussing the Dhamma at Dhamma Wheel, and we have created sub-forums (e.g. Classical Theravada, Abhidhamma) for such people to explore the Dhamma, without having to deal with other people challenging the basis for those views.
My intolerance of "them"? Of all the members on DW i have a problem with 1 person. Not because of his views but because of his methods of argumentation.
retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 12:08 am
similarly, people are allowed to explore the Dhamma in a way that gives primacy to the Suttas, over the commentary. In fact, it is the commentarial tradition itself, which establishes that the Tipitaka is to be given primacy over the Commentary. That scheme priortises Dhamma sources as follows...
1. Sutta: the three baskets of the Tipiṭaka.
2. Suttānuloma: a direct inference from the Tipiṭaka.
3. Atthakathā: a commentary.
4. Attanomati: the personal opinions of later generations of teachers.
Thus, even according to the commentary, one can be Theravadin by relying on sutta and suttānuloma alone.

:buddha1:
Again there is this assumption that Abhidhamma contradicts the Sutta and that following the Sutta and following the Abhidhamma are mutually exclusive. I would argue that this is simply not true as far as i can tell, having learned the Sutta first the Abhidhamma is simply complementary not that i am an expert in it but so far i see no problem with it.

A brief postscript for your entertainment and edification...
That is funny, i follow Sutta, i am quite well versed in the Sutta, probably more versed than you are. So go edificate someone else, maybe start with your Nanaviraist friends.

User avatar
Lucas Oliveira
Posts: 846
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by Lucas Oliveira » Mon Feb 04, 2019 1:29 am

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 11:46 pm
Lucas Oliveira wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 11:07 pm
Thanks rightviewftw for the remarks!

Thanks David DNS for the searches!

:anjali:
You are welcome mate,
i don't advice following such a buffet approach to mixing doctrines because people can not really be "Mostly Theravadin".
For example if a person accepts these doctrines;
  • An impermanent self as taught by the Pudgalavada school and some Modern Theravada and Mahayana teachers accounting for karma, rebirth and in keeping with a teaching that is not nihilism.
One is not a Theravadin because Theravadin litterature rejects the notion of neither permanent nor impermanent self as taught by pudgalovada, this school is criticized in the Kathavatthu Book of Abhidhamma.
However he can still call himself; "Modern Theravadin" which is a new age, new school kind of Buddhist who bases his views on Sutta basically.

As for this view;
  • The idea of a (Ālāya-vijñāna) consciousness as a continuum, including a store-house consciousness
This can also be harshly criticized and is indefensible based on the Sutta imho.

I think that this "Modern Theravada" movement is a term for any kind of modern interpretation of Sutta Pitaka and is a very misleading term because anybody can come up with such an interpretation.

One thing is to reject some 5th century commentarial notion when comparing it to Sutta another thing completely is to claim "I am a 99% Theravadin but i believe in God Creator". The latter is simply not a Theravadin.

Some people say "i am orthodox Buddhist, i follow only Sutta and reject Abhidhamma" well what if Abhidhamma is in line with the Sutta and can not be disproven with the Sutta? In that case this person is teaching baloney and is rejecting a rational interpretation of the Sutta in favor of his own theories.

Beware of a buffet approach to mixing doctrines!

As doctor Snyder says
(author note: This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)
It is probably a very unpopular idea presented on his website and i would be surprised if it is one held by even 1% of Theravadin Scholars.

Unfortunately the Theravadin Tradition nowadays is a lot messed up and there are several of what is referred to as "factions" which hold contradictory views within it. It is pretty much beyond schism at this point because groups in this environment get away with pretty much any views.

Thank you for the advice

It's very serious.
(author note: This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)
https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Original_Buddhism
would it be possible to leave room for criticism, as in other WIKI?
The official encyclopedia of The Dhamma website, a Buddhist encyclopedia. All traditions are welcome and anyone may suggest an article. E-mail david(at)TheDhamma(dot)com for any ideas you have for an article and it will be reviewed and may be added. All articles must first be e-mailed to avoid automatic bot vandalism (which has occurred in the past).
https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/Main_Page
Gratitude for the efforts that everyone is making for the better understanding of the Dhamma and their views!

:anjali:
I participate in this forum using Google Translator. http://translate.google.com.br

http://www.acessoaoinsight.net/

User avatar
Circle5
Posts: 945
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by Circle5 » Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:02 am

Greetings Rightviewftw,

One position that your analysis seems to discount, is the possibility that some people are interested in the Buddha's own teachings (Buddha-vacana), and not necessarily the sectarian doctrines and interpretations that were established, reified, and in some cases ossified, in the centuries that followed.

These people are likely to take an interest in Theravāda Buddhism, since Theravāda is the only extant tradition that gives any priority whatsoever to the Sutta Pitaka, but they will not be beholden to Theravāda's sectarian interpretations of the Sutta Pitaka. This is especially so, since the commentarial tradition attempts to retrofit its own works (e.g. the Abhidhamma Pitaka) into its understandings of the Sutta Pitaka. We see this process explained by Bhikkhu Bodhi...
:goodpost: What's good is that Buddha put in place a non-hierarchical system after his death specifically to avoid corruption of his teachings. He knew there is a big problem with people wanting to add up a ton of things inside his teachings. This was a problem while he was alive, especially when it came to adding a self into his teachings. This non-hierarchical system of independent monasteries has proven great at preserving the suttas uncorrupted. All new ideas that people couldn't keep themselves from adding in there, were added into these new abbhidhammas that every sect developed, rather than getting added directly into the suttas. Research has shown that suttas used by different sects are almost identical.

User avatar
Circle5
Posts: 945
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:14 am

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by Circle5 » Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:09 am

rightviewftw wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 1:09 am
If you work from an assumption that Early Theravadins had it wrong and Abhidhamma is wrong then this makes sense, otherwise it does not hold true. Each to their own but i find it to be quite arrogant position. What can you or i possibly figure out that the Arahants during the first 500 years of the sasana could not figure out? Nothing.
Buddha said that only after knowing a person for a long time, not for a short time, can you get an idea about him. How much time have you spent with these people you are speaking about?
I think Abhidhamma is not as creative of an explaination as people make it out to be. I would not call my self an expert of Abhidhamma but it seems simple enough and quite complementary. As for commentaries it is clearly a mixed bag and at times there are two mutually exclusive notions so those are not to be lumped together with the Abhidhamma.
Why is there nothing about that in the suttas? The Buddha said he did not teach the dhamma with a tight fist. Why are all these ideas about momentariness and etc. not present in the suttas? Is that an useful angle of looking at things? Is that the angle that the Buddha took when looking at things and teaching his dhamma? And most importantly: are they in line with reality, with how things really work?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bkmudita, JustSweepin and 159 guests