Page 2 of 4

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:13 am
by alan...
danieLion wrote:
alan... wrote:the canon has existed as long as other schools existed since the split of the sangha
Which split, and what, exactly, do you mean by sangha?
there was the buddhas original sangha, they had their suttas, then this sangha split off into many other sanghas. each kept some texts and omitted others and added new ones and then decided when to stop this process and keep it consistent, once this decision is made it's called "canonizing" the texts. a finalization of a set of texts is canonizing.

or a different example, if there are star wars books that lucas films agrees should be in the star wars story line, they are "canon". side stories by random authors that lucas films does not like are "not canon". same with the suttas, one school picks suttas 1-95 but leaves out 95-100, they stop there and don't make any more changes, they have "canonized" their texts. another school picks suttas 1-99 and adds another 50 suttas the other school doesn't include in their texts and stops there and they don't make any more changes, now they have their own, different "canon".

not sure if you really don't get this or if you're just trying to trip me up and catch me off guard to make it seem i don't know what i'm talking about or what?

the sangha split, this is a well known fact, every school had it's own texts called "canons" in todays english. they would have been called something else back then but still a similar word to differentiate between each others texts, otherwise there would be no way to differentiate between each schools texts. this is not a western imposition. canonizing existed before the west was a "thing".

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:19 am
by danieLion
alan... wrote:regardless of what it was called it is by definition and always has been a "canon". that's not a western notion.
Okay. What's the Pāli for "canon"?
alan... wrote:for example, one school has their texts, that's their canon, they don't accept such and such texts from another schools agreed upon texts which is the other schools "canon". this is not something imposed on anything, it's just the word we use to define a group of agreed upon texts.
"We" who?
alan... wrote:only schools that never agree on a set of texts or "canonize" their writings don't have a canon.
What do you mean by "schools"?

"Canon" is of Old maybe Middle English derivation. How did the Sarvastivadins, Theravadins, etc... create a "canon" when the word didn't exist yet?

Also, you say there are many canons. If so, how do you know which one is the canon?

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:27 am
by danieLion
alan... wrote:
danieLion wrote:
alan... wrote:the canon has existed as long as other schools existed since the split of the sangha
Which split, and what, exactly, do you mean by sangha?
alan... wrote:there was the buddhas original sangha, they had their suttas, then this sangha split off into many other sanghas. each kept some texts and omitted others and added new ones and then decided when to stop this process and keep it consistent, once this decision is made it's called "canonizing" the texts. a finalization of a set of texts is canonizing....

the sangha split, this is a well known fact, every school had it's own texts called "canons" in todays english. they would have been called something else back then but still a similar word to differentiate between each others texts, otherwise there would be no way to differentiate between each schools texts. this is not a western imposition. canonizing existed before the west was a "thing".
Citation needed. Aristotle's idea that heavy objects fall faster than lighter ones, in direct proportion to weight, was a well known fact until Galileo proved him wrong. I know your opinions. Show me your evidence.

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:29 am
by mikenz66
danieLion wrote:Okay. What's the Pāli for "canon"?
The Tipitaka (Pali ti, "three," + pitaka, "baskets"), or Pali canon, is the collection of primary Pali language texts which form the doctrinal foundation of Theravada Buddhism. The Tipitaka and the paracanonical Pali texts (commentaries, chronicles, etc.) together constitute the complete body of classical Theravada texts.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:anjali:
Mike

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:03 am
by danieLion
mikenz66 wrote:
danieLion wrote:Okay. What's the Pāli for "canon"?
The Tipitaka (Pali ti, "three," + pitaka, "baskets"), or Pali canon, is the collection of primary Pali language texts which form the doctrinal foundation of Theravada Buddhism. The Tipitaka and the paracanonical Pali texts (commentaries, chronicles, etc.) together constitute the complete body of classical Theravada texts.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:anjali:
Mike
This is good citation only to the extent that it demonstrates western imposition. Tipitaka means three baskets, not Pāli Canon. Thanissaro/ATI is one of the worst offenders.

This citation fails to answer the question. All this citation shows is how westerners misuse the word "canon" to refer to the Tipitaka. It does not tell me what the Pāli for "canon" is or explain how a word that wasn't event invented yet is supposed to be a meaningful symbol for the Pāli texts.

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:06 am
by Ben
Hi Alan...
alan... wrote:motion denied. sigh. oh well, i tried.

seriously give it some thought though.
Its not a case of 'motion denied'! Personally, I think what we have in place is working well. Though, I am happy to consider how we can do things better.
I will continue to give your suggestion due thought and I will be guided by our membership and the mod/admin team.
We do listen and act. So, please don't feel that your suggestion has fallen on deaf ears.
kind regards

Ben

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:25 am
by danieLion
On the Very Idea of the Pali Canon by Steve Collins.

also, alan...,
Do you equate "The Pali Canon" with "the dhamma"?

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 12:00 pm
by daverupa
It may help to note that, of the three baskets, the Suttapitakas have largely the same content from one school to the next. The Vinayapitakas differ widely, because they are keyed to local issues and lay input as well as cultural expressions and the lot. The Abhidhammapitakas differ in nearly every respect between the schools.

Saying "canon" lumps and blends these distinctions, which can make things confusing.
"buddha never existed. canon is a hodge podge of different authors and presents an inconsistent, confused whole. jhana is not possible except to a select few. no one has ever reached nibbana."
...and I've not seen this on the forum of late... not even the hodge-podge statement, or the Buddha's historicity; while it sometimes gets thrown in as a parenthetical, it's unsupported hyperskepticism.

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:15 pm
by appicchato
One person's debunk is another's bunk, which is, if asked, what I'd call this idea...anyone getting cold feet at the first sign of beliefs that don't coincide with what they think, or feel, should be the truth isn't ready for the path...when one IS ready, one will take the time to research, evaluate, contemplate, meditate, and a few other ates to form an informed basis of their own feelings, thoughts, and beliefs concerning the way forward...or not at all...

Life's all about winnowing the chaff from the grain...an earnest practitioner, or potential practitioner, will make the effort to discern which is which...

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:20 pm
by tiltbillings
This is enough to make me do a bunk.

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 5:52 pm
by DNS
alan... wrote: obviously the site administrator being behind this attitude means it is doomed to stay this way.
What is the basis for this assertion / borderline personal attack? I assume this is directed at me? I suppose this is "payback" for me daring to suggest that some might consider discussing jhanas with their teacher. I have no problem with you or anyone else discussing jhanas here or with others, especially when one does not have a teacher accessible; as I mentioned in several subsequent posts, it was just a suggestion that needs not to be taken or accepted. And it came from seeing how others have experiences discussing any kind of attainments including jhanas here and on other forums, even if the attainments and jhana are genuine. You placed several rolling eyes emoticons after my posts, which is understandable since I have written quite a bit on the Dhamma here, Dhamma Wiki, and other places. I have written a grand total of one tiny paragraph on my meditation experiences and jhanas and for that I have received numerous criticisms, complaints, etc. which is why I made that suggestion -- it was from years of experience in this thing, but again, it is not advice that is required to be taken.

In fact, I somewhat agree with you about the constant debunking of the Dhamma. It can be somewhat frustrating to constantly see new posts, new topics about how rebirth has no basis, or worse yet, that it was not taught by the Buddha, etc. You won't find any posts by me (you can check) debunking rebirth or the Buddha. I accept literal rebirth and accept that the Buddha taught literal rebirth as is clearly evident in the Suttas.

In addition to the other great posts above and Ben's mention of the Discovering Theravada sub-forum, we also have the "Classical Theravada" section where debunking is not allowed, where the standards are higher and the Pali Canon is considered authentic (for discussion purposes).

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:27 pm
by alan...
David N. Snyder wrote:
alan... wrote: obviously the site administrator being behind this attitude means it is doomed to stay this way.
What is the basis for this assertion / borderline personal attack? I assume this is directed at me? I suppose this is "payback" for me daring to suggest that some might consider discussing jhanas with their teacher. I have no problem with you or anyone else discussing jhanas here or with others, especially when one does not have a teacher accessible; as I mentioned in several subsequent posts, it was just a suggestion that needs not to be taken or accepted. And it came from seeing how others have experiences discussing any kind of attainments including jhanas here and on other forums, even if the attainments and jhana are genuine. You placed several rolling eyes emoticons after my posts, which is understandable since I have written quite a bit on the Dhamma here, Dhamma Wiki, and other places. I have written a grand total of one tiny paragraph on my meditation experiences and jhanas and for that I have received numerous criticisms, complaints, etc. which is why I made that suggestion -- it was from years of experience in this thing, but again, it is not advice that is required to be taken.

In fact, I somewhat agree with you about the constant debunking of the Dhamma. It can be somewhat frustrating to constantly see new posts, new topics about how rebirth has no basis, or worse yet, that it was not taught by the Buddha, etc. You won't find any posts by me (you can check) debunking rebirth or the Buddha. I accept literal rebirth and accept that the Buddha taught literal rebirth as is clearly evident in the Suttas.


In addition to the other great posts above and Ben's mention of the Discovering Theravada sub-forum, we also have the "Classical Theravada" section where debunking is not allowed, where the standards are higher and the Pali Canon is considered authentic (for discussion purposes).
what? no that was in reply to ben, isn't he a site administrator? i wasn't attacking him either. it's not even really that big of a deal to me, the playfulness in my writing must not have come accross. SORRY GUYS!!! :hug:

and the rolling eyes, also not supposed to be super harsh. just a response since i felt like i was being blown off when asking about a standard buddhist practice on a buddhist forum and basically i was told i shouldn't ask such things except to my teacher which i don't have nor can i get without somehow moving near a temple or something but i'm quite poor. i didn't imagine that the silly smileys that are right next to the post box would be offensive since they're cute, silly and clearly suggested to be used.

again, sorry if i offended!!!

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:30 pm
by alan...
this has turned into a poo storm and i feel like i've offended some people with a failed attempt at playfulness and facetiousness that didn't come across well in writing, so i'm just going to say: :heart: :heart: :heart: SORRY ALL AROUND. :heart: :heart: :heart:

and walk away from this thread.

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:38 pm
by mikenz66
danieLion wrote:On the Very Idea of the Pali Canon by Steve Collins.

also, alan...,
Do you equate "The Pali Canon" with "the dhamma"?
Yes, this makes some interesting points. The message I take from that, other studies, my personal experience, this thread, and the bickering sometimes (by no means always!) seen on this board about whether or not something or other is "authentic" or "Buddha-vacana" is that it is very easy for me to get distracted from the point of the Dhamma.

I place a lot of value on my interactions with the living tradition of monastic and lay people, and I would be delighted if discussions on this Forum were more like those interactions, i.e. respectful sharing of ideas, and a recognition that the various interpretations one sees of the Dhamma are just that: different interpretations, not choices between right and wrong that can be decided upon by debate. After all, we are talking about the possibility of a path to liberation, which implies the importance of action and experience.

However, this is a discussion Forum run by volunteers, so the climate of the Forum is to a large extent determined by the tendencies of the Members. Moderators/Administrators are certainly very aware that discussions are not always constructive and do take steps to reorient things as far as we are able.

:anjali:
Mike

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:41 pm
by alan...
Ben wrote:Hi Alan...
alan... wrote:motion denied. sigh. oh well, i tried.

seriously give it some thought though.
Its not a case of 'motion denied'! Personally, I think what we have in place is working well. Though, I am happy to consider how we can do things better.
I will continue to give your suggestion due thought and I will be guided by our membership and the mod/admin team.
We do listen and act. So, please don't feel that your suggestion has fallen on deaf ears.
kind regards

Ben
sorry if i came off as rude ben! not my intention, all playful facetiousness!

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:56 pm
by DNS
alan...,

No worries. The written word can be hard to decipher sometimes and it can be easy to misjudge tone, etc.; just wanted to make sure you know that you are welcome here. It's all good, no harm done.

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:02 pm
by alan...
David N. Snyder wrote:alan...,

No worries. The written word can be hard to decipher sometimes and it can be easy to misjudge tone, etc.; just wanted to make sure you know that you are welcome here. It's all good, no harm done.
:smile:

thanks for being understanding.

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:59 pm
by Dan74
mikenz66 wrote:
I place a lot of value on my interactions with the living tradition of monastic and lay people, and I would be delighted if discussions on this Forum were more like those interactions, i.e. respectful sharing of ideas, and a recognition that the various interpretations one sees of the Dhamma are just that: different interpretations, not choices between right and wrong that can be decided upon by debate. After all, we are talking about the possibility of a path to liberation, which implies the importance of action and experience.
Hear, hear!

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:19 pm
by SDC
danieLion wrote:Alan, what are you talking about? By my recollection we haven't had an official "debunker" here since Contemplans.
That guy was the best.

Re: on the constant debunking of the dhamma on this forum

Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:31 pm
by tiltbillings
SDC wrote:
danieLion wrote:Alan, what are you talking about? By my recollection we haven't had an official "debunker" here since Contemplans.
That guy was the best.
That is, if one likes a Roman Catholic subsumptive approach to the Dhamma that ignores and dismisses any Buddhist counter to what he was saying. He may have been the best, but the question: the best what?