Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by Virgo »

Alex123 wrote:
How do you know that there are no Arahant in human realm at this time?


With metta,

Alex
That is according to the texts, not my opinion. I have no way to verify it through personal experience.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by tiltbillings »

Virgo wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
How do you know that there are no Arahant in human realm at this time?


With metta,

Alex
That is according to the texts, not my opinion. I have no way to verify it through personal experience.
What texts? If you are going to claim textual support for something, then supply the texual evidence.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by Virgo »

adeh wrote:".....no good and virtuous recluses and brahmins in the world who have realized for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world." This is wrong view. [MN. 117:5]
Beleiving that there are currently no Arahants in the world now is not wrong view, it is Right View. There are good and viruous recluses and brahmins int he world who have realized for themselves by direct knowlegde. There are just of the first three stages of enlightenment. In other realms, there are ones of the final stage. It is not as though they don't exist. Besides I think that verse it talking about the Buddha. Disbelieving that the Buddha is enlightened and knows this world and all the other worlds is wrong view, not thinking that there aren't Arahants around now.

kevin
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by Virgo »

tiltbillings wrote:
Virgo wrote: From the traditional point of view there are no more Arahants in the human realm right now. But people can still become liberated. There can still be sotapannas, sakadagami, and anagami. One will attain Arahatta in one of the other realms.

Kevin
Then there is another reason to reject the traditional view, but let us see the basis of your claim.
No. The view is based on the truth that people of this day and age have less parami.

Kevin
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by tiltbillings »

Virgo wrote:
Kevin
Then there is another reason to reject the traditional view, but let us see the basis of your claim.[/quote]
No. The view is based on the truth that people of this day and age have less parami.[/quote]Says who?

You keep making these claims, but offering no support. You are fast moving to a put-up-or-shut-up situation.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Kenshou
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by Kenshou »

Not the parami thread again!
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by tiltbillings »

Kenshou wrote:Not the parami thread again!
No. That will not happen here. We are now in a patient holding pattern while Kevin supplies us with a textual source for his claims.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by Virgo »

tiltbillings wrote:
Virgo wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
How do you know that there are no Arahant in human realm at this time?


With metta,

Alex
That is according to the texts, not my opinion. I have no way to verify it through personal experience.
What texts? If you are going to claim textual support for something, then supply the texual evidence.
  • On the degrees of Ariyanship during the Dispensation of Gotoma Buddha
    "But the Buddha thought of people with different accumulations. He praised samatha, and the person who deserves the highest respect is the person endowed with jhanas, supranatural powers and the four <analytical knowledges>, patisambiddhas. In the Co. it has been explained that when further away from the Buddha's time the arahats have less excellent qualities, no more analytical knowledges. In the Co. to the In the ³Samantapåsådikå², in the Commentary to the Vinaya, to the Cullavagga, Ch X, on Nuns, the decline of Buddhism has been explained in the Buddha era of this Buddha, the Buddha Gotama.

    This Commentary explains about the degrees of paññå of ariyans in the different periods after the Buddha¹s passing away. During the period of the first thousand years there were still arahats with the four ³analytical knowledges², paìisambhidå . In the following period of thousand years there were only arahats who are sukkha vipassaka, those who had not attained any stage of jhåna, but who had developed only insight. In the third period of thousand years there are only people who have attained the state of non-returner, anågåmí, in the fourth period of thousand years there are only sakadågåmís and in the fifth period of thousand years there are only sotåpannas."
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by tiltbillings »

Virgo wrote: That is according to the texts,. . . in the fifth period of thousand years there are only sotåpannas."
The usual commentarial stuff, which fortunately not all Theravadins take as being the final word. That said, please get back to the actual subject.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
adeh
Posts: 215
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:42 pm
Location: Mexico City

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by adeh »

In note 425 to Sutta 41 of the Majjima Nikaya, which also uses the same quote to define wrong view, Bhikkhu Bodhi states: "The statement about recluses and brahmins [means one] denies the existence of Buddhas and Arahants."
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by Nyana »

tiltbillings wrote:The usual commentarial stuff, which fortunately not all Theravadins take as being the final word. That said, please get back to the actual subject.
"The usual commentarial stuff" is the actual subject.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by tiltbillings »

Ñāṇa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:The usual commentarial stuff, which fortunately not all Theravadins take as being the final word. That said, please get back to the actual subject.
"The usual commentarial stuff" is the actual subject.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by tiltbillings »

Ñāṇa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:The usual commentarial stuff, which fortunately not all Theravadins take as being the final word. That said, please get back to the actual subject.
"The usual commentarial stuff" is the actual subject.
Yes; however, what I was meaning to say is not get side tracked on a very specific issue and the threats of damnation.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by tiltbillings »

It might be worth discussing to what degree the Mahāvihāra commentarial tenets are reliable and accurate references regarding the teaching of the Buddha (Buddhasāsana), particularly as it pertains to right view (sammādiṭṭhi), as right view is essential for right meditation (sammāsamādhi).
Well, having just awoken from a nap, letting the cobwebs clear, I suppose the question of the possibility of becoming an arahant at present is relevant as are the threats to hell, but usual commentarial stuff about the decline in achievement is well known, what about the threats of hell for those who do not believe in them. Where is the textual evidence for that? (Telling people here that they are going to hell, making bad kamma, becusae they do not beleive a certain way is not part of this discussion.)

One of the other areas of commentarial defict is in history. Richard Gombrich has pointed out correctly that the commentaries to a a very poor job of puting the Buddha's teachings in their historical context vis a vis the brahmins and their teachings, which is something worth looking at.

But one of the question I have in looking at all this: does - eschatology aside - the traditional point view on dhamma theory, jhana and such of view actually prevent one from attaining awakening? Looking at the likes of Burmese vipassana traditions, they seem to think that more than sotapanna is possible, and they are coming out of a traditional point of view. Arahant status has been atributed to more than one of the new Burmese vipassana teachers, such as Sunlun, which suggests not being slavish to the commentaries.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
pt1
Posts: 417
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:30 am

Re: Reliability of Mahāvihāra Commentaries?... Right View

Post by pt1 »

tiltbillings wrote:Looking at the likes of Burmese vipassana traditions, they seem to think that more than sotapanna is possible, and they are coming out of a traditional point of view. Arahant status has been atributed to more than one of the new Burmese vipassana teachers, such as Sunlun, which suggests not being slavish to the commentaries.
I remember there was a post by Ven.Dhammanando on dsg where he explained that there are in fact several different accounts in the commentaries regarding the progress of the sasana decline - i.e. whether arahats are possible nowadays or not. It was something to the effect that Digha bhanakas said one thing and Anguttara bhanakas said something else - and Buddhagosa then accurately reported this discrepancy, without trying to insert his own opinion or argue in favor of one over the other (another reason why I like Buddhaghosa). I'll try to find this post a bit later.

Best wishes
Post Reply