ancientbuddhism wrote:I prefer to distinguish what are the teachings of the Buddha, as closely as I can discern from the suttas. And as I have none other than the Buddha as Ajahn...
An interesting & suitable case study is the late Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. Many regarded the late Buddhadasa Bhikkhu as a renegade & a heretic. Alternately, some of his disciples assert the late Buddhadasa Bhikkhu was a "radical conservative", i.e., a strict adherent to the Pali suttas. But in truth, neither were the case.
The late Buddhadasa Bhikkhu certainly had his differences of opinion with much of the Buddhist world about Dependent Origination. However, he probably only chose his interpretation because he personally regarded it has having more value & utility.
But the late Buddhadasa Bhikkhu did not merely accept or reject Buddhist teachings on the basis of a literal conformity with the Pali Suttas. For example, much of his extensive work on
Anapanasati is based on the various Commentaries. Or in the print version of his brief translated work on
Paticcasamuppada, the late Buddhadasa Bhikkhu said he agreed with 90% of what Buddhaghosa wrote in his Vissuddhimagga.
Similarly, the late Buddhadasa Bhikkhu devoted an entire chapter of his work Handbook for Mankind to (Burmese)
organised systems of vipassana.
It follows such a case study exemplifies using a criteria based on what is advantageous.
Neither the term Study (Gantha - dhura) nor Vipassana - dhura is mentioned in the Tipitaka, both appearing only in later books; but Vipassana - dhura is nevertheless a genuine Buddhist practice, designed for people intent on eliminating suffering. It is based directly on sustained, concentrated introspection.
