Buddhists discussing, debating, and disagreeing with other Buddhists on a variety of subjects is almost as ancient as Buddhism itself.Sanghamitta wrote:It certainly is.mikenz66 wrote:This is a good point. I'd extend this (if Geoff didn't already mean this) to texts by reputable teachers/commentators. I would prefer to avoid saying "In my experience it works like X" if I can find a passage that says roughly what I would have said, that I can quote as: "Ven. Y says it works like X".Ñāṇa wrote: Indeed. Preferably with the focus on the texts and not personal experiences. This is standard Buddhist etiquette.
And I certainly agree with Geoff that vipassana attainments are no less problematical to explain than jhana attainments (not that I have anything much to explain about either...). From what I can gather from various teachers it is very possible to severely misinterpret progress with the vipassana nanas.
Mike
And I would be less bothered by Jnana talk if it were indeed conducted according to standard Buddhist etiquette.
This particular subject of debate appears in the Kathāvatthu, where, for a number of reasons, the proposed resolution isn't very convincing. It also appears in the Abhidharmakośabhāsya in terms somewhat related to certain aspects of contemporary discussions of the subject. After presenting both sides of the debate, Vasubandhu concludes by saying the following:
- A certain school maintains the system that has been presented, but the ancient masters (pūrvācārya-s) are not in agreement on this. Consequently the point should be further examined.
All the best,
Geoff