Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
rightviewftw
Posts: 2432
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by rightviewftw »

Circle5 wrote:
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?
How much time have you spent with the Buddha?
Circle5 wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 2:09 am
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?
Nothing in the Sutta about what exactly, be specific? As far as i know this Momentariness of which you seem to speak is not even in the Abhidhamma but is a sub-commentary development.

User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by salayatananirodha »

I've read some good stuff (stuff that appears to match early buddhist texts) in places like the diamond sūtra
And I've read a lot of bad commentarial exegesis, and it's often mixed in with the dhamma, so that a serious practitioner eventually has to unlearn what they've learned as the dhamma for true dhamma.
Abhidhamma introduces a lot of new terms that dont exist in the rest of the canon, and it's not as intelligible as the suttas are, it appears to me to make the dhamma out to be esoteric, so in summary we should look outside this tradition, even though it has very wholesome components, in order to get the full picture
And that's my opinion
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/wp-conte ... _Heart.pdf
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

Calmoid
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:49 am

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by Calmoid »

I wonder if Abhidhamma was ever thought to humans? Did someone ever got enlightened having been thought Abhidhamma?

It seems to me it's a sport for a group of individuals with incredible analytical abilities.

User avatar
Manopubbangama
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2018 4:17 pm
Location: Pennsylvania Route 969 *Europe*

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by Manopubbangama »

Calmoid wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:58 am
I wonder if Abhidhamma was ever thought to humans? Did someone ever got enlightened having been thought Abhidhamma?

It seems to me it's a sport for a group of individuals with incredible analytical abilities.
Its not for everyone! The Burmese are the strongest in this area. :anjali: :buddha1:

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 13133
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 »

rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 11:46 pm
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.


Correct and this is why I don't say I am an orthodox Theravada Buddhist. There are those that do follow all different types of views within Theravada and then still call themselves Theravadin, so that is why I am careful not to identify as the orthodox or classical view.
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.
Yes, that is the case in all religions; that there are a plethora of views. Take for example one of the key issues in Buddhism with the concept of anatta. There are numerous discussions right here on DW about that and there are a wide range of views, ranging from the eternalism extreme to the nihilism extreme and several in between. And it's not just here on DW, see the sections on it at wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatta#Current_disputes

Note the references to the so-called true self, Dhammakaya, etc. The so-called permanent citta ("that never dies") and other views for example where Ajahn Boowa claims that Ajahn Mun "talked to the Buddha." These people still call themselves Theravadins. My own view is not that extreme (I don't accept the view of a permanent citta, permanent self, that one can "talk" to Buddha, etc), but still to not mislead, I wouldn't identify as an orthodox or classical Theravadin.

Everything exists: That is one extreme. Everything doesn't exist: That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications . . . (continues with Dependent Orgination formula). (Samyutta Nikaya 12.15)

rightviewftw
Posts: 2432
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by rightviewftw »

DNS wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 9:06 pm
rightviewftw wrote:
Sun Feb 03, 2019 11:46 pm
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.


Correct and this is why I don't say I am an orthodox Theravada Buddhist. There are those that do follow all different types of views within Theravada and then still call themselves Theravadin, so that is why I am careful not to identify as the orthodox or classical view.
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.
Yes, that is the case in all religions; that there are a plethora of views. Take for example one of the key issues in Buddhism with the concept of anatta. There are numerous discussions right here on DW about that and there are a wide range of views, ranging from the eternalism extreme to the nihilism extreme and several in between. And it's not just here on DW, see the sections on it at wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatta#Current_disputes

Note the references to the so-called true self, Dhammakaya, etc. The so-called permanent citta ("that never dies") and other views for example where Ajahn Boowa claims that Ajahn Mun "talked to the Buddha." These people still call themselves Theravadins. My own view is not that extreme (I don't accept the view of a permanent citta, permanent self, that one can "talk" to Buddha, etc), but still to not mislead, I wouldn't identify as an orthodox or classical Theravadin.

Everything exists: That is one extreme. Everything doesn't exist: That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications . . . (continues with Dependent Orgination formula). (Samyutta Nikaya 12.15)
In my opinion all these disorders stem from people not following protocol when talking about the Dhamma, when questioning each other on matters pertaining to the Dhamma and this is not ok. I personally think that if people followed the protocol such as these guidelines;
"Monks, it's through his way of participating in a discussion that a person can be known as fit to talk with or unfit to talk with. If a person, when asked a question, doesn't give a categorical answer to a question deserving a categorical answer, doesn't give an analytical (qualified) answer to a question deserving an analytical answer, doesn't give a counter-question to a question deserving a counter-question, doesn't put aside a question deserving to be put aside, then — that being the case — he is a person unfit to talk with.

If a person, when asked a question, doesn't stand by what is possible and impossible, doesn't stand by agreed-upon assumptions, doesn't stand by teachings known to be true,[1] doesn't stand by standard procedure, then — that being the case — he is a person unfit to talk with. But if a person, when asked a question, stands by what is possible and impossible, stands by agreed-upon assumptions, stands by teachings known to be true, stands by standard procedure, then — that being the case — he is a person fit to talk with.

If a person, when asked a question, wanders from one thing to another, pulls the discussion off the topic, shows anger & aversion and sulks, then — that being the case — he is a person unfit to talk with. But if a person, when asked a question, doesn't wander from one thing to another, doesn't pull the discussion off the topic, doesn't show anger or aversion or sulk, then — that being the case — he is a person fit to talk with.
if you think he has either misunderstood the sense or expressed it wrongly, you should neither applaud nor reject it, but should say to him: “Friend, if you mean such-and-such, you should put it either like this or like that: which is the more appropriate?” or: “If you say such-and-such, you mean either this or that: which is the more appropriate?” If he replies: “This meaning is better expressed like this than like that”, or: “The sense of this expression is this rather than that”, then his words should be neither rejected nor disparaged, but you should explain to him carefully the correct meaning and expression. -DN29
A lot more people would be arriving at a proper understanding and alignment. If these are not followed it leads to disruption, discord and decline.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 22907
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
rightviewftw wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 9:51 pm
If these are not followed it leads to disruption, discord and decline.
I agree on this point, but do not necessarily agree with this...
rightviewftw wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 9:51 pm
A lot more people would be arriving at a proper understanding and alignment.
... because invariably people are attached to their views. As the Buddha said, "this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases". Until individuals make an effort to eradicate these anusaya for themselves, they are precluding themselves from proper understanding and alignment. This is the way of the world, but we cannot expect others to adhere to our personal standards, nor is it fair and reasonable to impose our proclivities on others, no matter how in accord with the Dhamma they may be. The Dhamma is not an instrument of control to be imposed upon another.

Here at Dhamma Wheel, we created a Terms of Service that outline appropriate standards for discussion, but that doesn't mean that all members necessarily follow them... and (to dovetail back to your sutta reference) if by doing so they demonstrate they are not "a person fit to talk with" vis-a-vis the Terms of Service, they may be forcibly ejected - either temporarily or permanently.

If an individual decides for themselves that someone else is not "a person fit to talk with", they are advised to apply proper sense restraint, and if necessary add them as a "foe" in the User Control Panel so that this person is filtered out of their feed. Unlike incessant whinging and complaining, such sense restraint does not lead to "disruption, discord and decline".

Now, as outrageous as your topic's subject matter is, it's probably time to return to it.

:focus:

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)

"Overcome the liar by truth." (Dhp 223)

rightviewftw
Posts: 2432
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by rightviewftw »

retrofuturist wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:03 pm
Here at Dhamma Wheel, we created a Terms of Service that outline appropriate standards for discussion, but that doesn't mean that all members necessarily follow them... and (to dovetail back to your sutta reference) if by doing so they demonstrate they are not "a person fit to talk with" vis-a-vis the Terms of Service, they may be forcibly ejected - either temporarily or permanently.
Please do not compare or equate the TOS to the guidelines set by the Buddha. The Buddha has already set the appropriate standards, what you have here is nowhere close to optimal guidelines for discussion of the Dhamma.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 22907
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Breaking News! Theravada down on Original Buddhism rankings

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings rightviewftw,
rightviewftw wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 10:19 pm
Please do not compare or equate the TOS to the guidelines set by the Buddha. The Buddha has already set the appropriate standards, what you have here is nowhere close to optimal guidelines for discussion of the Dhamma.
Every house has its own house rules.

If you wish to be in an abode where others are obliged to adhere to the discipline of the Buddha, then I suggest you ordain and make your next abode a vihara.

Inflicting your turmoil upon us, however, is merely grounds for "disruption, discord and decline"... hence why disruptive meta-discussion is a violation of our Terms of Service.

You have received fair warning, so if you continue to ignore the Terms of Service, you do so at your own peril.

:focus:

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)

"Overcome the liar by truth." (Dhp 223)

Post Reply