Sorry for another one but i have another seperate question
Id like to get some advice and opinions from everyone
Can ones practice be frutiful (and lead to nibbana) without referring to the commentaries?
I only ask because I hardly ever look at them anymore i just rely on my experience, the suttas and Dhamma talks however ive noticed that other people seem to use them a lot and some stress there use so i wanted to get some advice if other people think its wise not to use them?
A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
Last edited by retrofuturist on Sun Mar 22, 2009 12:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Topic changed for clarity
Reason: Topic changed for clarity
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Another Commentary topic
In my opinion it is important to either be familiar with them yourself or to have a teacher who is familiar with them. The suttas are simply too vague in too many places to rely on them alone. Vagueness leave plenty of room for an unawakened practitioner to insert his own deluded interpretations. Never forget that the reason we suffer is because of delusion; the reason the Buddha taught is because he was free from delusion. We need to rely on the teachings of others if we are to get free from this maze.
People who believe all they need to awaken is read some suttas are, in my opinion, allowing themselves to be lead by their pride. Of course, such a person will read this statement and their pride will not let them believe it.
People who believe all they need to awaken is read some suttas are, in my opinion, allowing themselves to be lead by their pride. Of course, such a person will read this statement and their pride will not let them believe it.
- Peter
Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
Re: Another Commentary topic
Peter wrote:In my opinion it is important to either be familiar with them yourself or to have a teacher who is familiar with them. The suttas are simply too vague in too many places to rely on them alone. Vagueness leave plenty of room for an unawakened practitioner to insert his own deluded interpretations. Never forget that the reason we suffer is because of delusion; the reason the Buddha taught is because he was free from delusion. We need to rely on the teachings of others if we are to get free from this maze.
People who believe all they need to awaken is read some suttas are, in my opinion, allowing themselves to be lead by their pride. Of course, such a person will read this statement and their pride will not let them believe it.
Thanks peter
I agree with you that reading the Suttas isnt enough
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Another Commentary topic
Greetings Craig,
Metta,
Retro.
There were plenty of Noble Ones before anyone even thought of creating commentaries... so the answer is yes, of course.clw_uk wrote:Can ones practice be frutiful (and lead to nibbana) without referring to the commentaries?
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Another Commentary topic
Hello Retro,
Can you tell us about some of them, and how you know they were Noble, and how you know they were never aware of the explanations in the Commentaries?
metta
Chris
Can you tell us about some of them, and how you know they were Noble, and how you know they were never aware of the explanations in the Commentaries?
metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Another Commentary topic
Greetings Chris,
Metta,
Retro.
They are the Noble Ones of the Pali Canon - that includes the Buddha of course.Can you tell us about some of them?
When the suttas say they were noble, I believe them.how you know they were Noble?
Because the Mahavihara was but a twinkle in the Buddha's eye.how you know they were never aware of the explanations in the Commentaries?
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
The first five Arahants
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
I think you forget that those first disciples had extraordinary kamma and a stock of paramitas that not only gave them direct access to the Buddha, but a mind so developed that with the vipassana developed while listening to one discourse, liberation.
I think its also a mistake to compare ourselves with the Buddha's first disciples. Not only for the reason I gave above. These people who arose in a culture very similar to the Buddha, spoke his language, and were given discourses tailored to their state of mind and their personal inclinations. We are far removed from those particular contexts and we view the words of the Buddha through a matrix of conditionings, translation problems and our own delusions.
Having said that, let me add that the commentarial tradition began while the Buddha was alive. Often when monks approached the Buddha, He would give a brief discourse which would then be elucidated by Sariputta and MahaKaccana. On a number of occassions, the Buddha praised the explanation of the Dhamma by his senior monks and said that if he were to explain it himself it would not be any different. Nyaniponika Thera in 'Abhidhamma Studies' also asserts that while the core of the Abhidhamma Mantikas were probably composed by the Buddha, it was Sariputta and Sariputta's students who fleshed it out. The Commentarial tradition began with the Buddha and his senior disciples as a method to explain the Dhamma to those who were less realised or did not have the paramitas to penetrate the Dhamma unassisted.
Kind regards
Ben
I think its also a mistake to compare ourselves with the Buddha's first disciples. Not only for the reason I gave above. These people who arose in a culture very similar to the Buddha, spoke his language, and were given discourses tailored to their state of mind and their personal inclinations. We are far removed from those particular contexts and we view the words of the Buddha through a matrix of conditionings, translation problems and our own delusions.
Having said that, let me add that the commentarial tradition began while the Buddha was alive. Often when monks approached the Buddha, He would give a brief discourse which would then be elucidated by Sariputta and MahaKaccana. On a number of occassions, the Buddha praised the explanation of the Dhamma by his senior monks and said that if he were to explain it himself it would not be any different. Nyaniponika Thera in 'Abhidhamma Studies' also asserts that while the core of the Abhidhamma Mantikas were probably composed by the Buddha, it was Sariputta and Sariputta's students who fleshed it out. The Commentarial tradition began with the Buddha and his senior disciples as a method to explain the Dhamma to those who were less realised or did not have the paramitas to penetrate the Dhamma unassisted.
Kind regards
Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
Greetings Ben,
Another implication of the hypothesis that the commentaries are required for nibbana is that every single Buddhist school with the exception of Theravada is somehow completely barren with respect to stream-entrants or higher. Is that a consequence we really wish to insist on?
Metta,
Retro.
This leaves though the historical fact that it is only the Theravada tradition that possesses the Abhidhamma. None of the other early schools possessed the Abhidhamma Pitaka of the Theravadins, even though they all shared the common inheritance of the suttas.Ben wrote:Nyaniponika Thera in 'Abhidhamma Studies' also asserts that while the core of the Abhidhamma Mantikas were probably composed by the Buddha, it was Sariputta and Sariputta's students who fleshed it out.
Sure, there's always been Dhamma teachers who teach the Buddhadhamma to others, but unless the Buddha was there to state that he would have explained it the same way etc., then how can it be known that the Buddha really would endorse such an explanation? From a strict Theravadin perspective, all the other teachers of all the different Buddhist schools went wrong somewhere along the line with their Dhammic exegeses... what makes us so certain that in the Theravadin tradition not a single teaching up until about a millennium after the Buddha's parinibbana, was in some way a deviation from what the Buddha said or intended? We see all the variations in perspectives which exist nowadays, yet must also honestly face that differences in understanding have always existed and that the first 1000 years of Theravada Buddhism are not somehow immune to this. Even the Mahavihara was in disagreement with their rival schools...Ben wrote:The Commentarial tradition began with the Buddha and his senior disciples as a method to explain the Dhamma to those who were less realised or did not have the paramitas to penetrate the Dhamma unassisted.
Another implication of the hypothesis that the commentaries are required for nibbana is that every single Buddhist school with the exception of Theravada is somehow completely barren with respect to stream-entrants or higher. Is that a consequence we really wish to insist on?
Metta,
Retro.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
Well said retro,
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
Whose commentaries? Theravadin? Sarvastivadin? Or any number of other schools? Why priviledge one sret of commentaries over another?A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
The commentaries have their place and role to play, but they are not the suttas or Vinaya texts. In working with the suttas (without the commentaries) is important to keep a "don't know" mind and not to jump to a hasty conclusion about what a particular text is saying. But the answer to the eponymous question is yes.
>> 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
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
Re: A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
Whose commentaries? Theravadin? Sarvastivadin? Or any number of other schools? Why priviledge one sret of commentaries over another?
Any school's commentary
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
Commentaries are particular sets of interpretations by knowledgeable individuals. Also, commentarial stances of a particular school may change over time, or nor be quite in sync from one text to another. Are they absolutely necessary? No, but they should not be dismissed easily, given, in part, that represent a school's understanding of the Buddha's teachings.Any school's commentary
>> 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
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
Re: A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
Retro
I sense in your post an assumption that we accept the commentaries in blind faith. I am not suggesting that. I think that we continually test the Dhamma by practicing it and analyzing it and continually comparing and contrasting our own experiences with material in the tipitaka and the commentaries. If there was a serious error in the commentaries than I think that it would become the subject of ongoing discourse and correction as highly realised individuals found that their right understanding was out of phase with the erroneous commentary. An example of this was Venerable Ledi Sayadaw who corrected earlier commentaries of the Abhidhamma in his Paramatthadipani Tika and other works.
Kind regards
Ben
I sense in your post an assumption that we accept the commentaries in blind faith. I am not suggesting that. I think that we continually test the Dhamma by practicing it and analyzing it and continually comparing and contrasting our own experiences with material in the tipitaka and the commentaries. If there was a serious error in the commentaries than I think that it would become the subject of ongoing discourse and correction as highly realised individuals found that their right understanding was out of phase with the erroneous commentary. An example of this was Venerable Ledi Sayadaw who corrected earlier commentaries of the Abhidhamma in his Paramatthadipani Tika and other works.
Kind regards
Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: A fruitful practice and nibbana, without the commentaries?
clw_uk,
I do not know if you have read any actual commentaries,so here is a commentaries of the Satipatthana Sutta. Take some time; read through it carefully.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... wayof.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Commentaries may not be the final word, but they are important word.
I do not know if you have read any actual commentaries,so here is a commentaries of the Satipatthana Sutta. Take some time; read through it carefully.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... wayof.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Commentaries may not be the final word, but they are important word.
>> 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
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