Imho both views are authentic but (authentically ) conflicting. Seems to be part of the old Abhidharma-Suttanta dichotomy with Sutras primarily showing some "Putthujanic" view on reality with things that seem to really exist out of themselves, world-systems being destroyed by the elements of fire, water, wind and so forth and on the other hand side the quantized, unreal world-view of Abhidharma which mainly seems to have come from meditative experience and aimed at meditators or people interested to know how it really is.TMingyur wrote:I have known beforehand that there are Theravadins who hold a realist view.
But the question Is Theravada "Realist"? implies that there is an authority with reference to Theravada tenets. If this is so who/what is that authority?
Its a bit shitty that the Theravada commentaries arent easily accessible so its very hard to see if there is / was a common ground or if they somehow managed to bring those two views together as later schools tried.
For the student its really hard anyways because - which maybe as a Vajrayani you understand best - always have to accept the whoel cake, including all the shortcomings and have to be careful not to interprete too much or put your own stuff in there.