On the authority of the suttas.

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Polar Bear
Posts: 1348
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am

On the authority of the suttas.

Post by Polar Bear »

A quote from Danielion:
Did the Buddha teach that the suttas are a valid source of authority?

Corollary: are the suttas a proper object for a Buddhist to have faith in?

Add the rapidly growing body of historical-critical scholarship into the mix, and we have a sobering effect on those who believe in the authoritative nature of the texts.
How do we decide what was most likely spoken by the historical buddha and what was not? Mind you, let us not make slippery slope arguments.
"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 4016
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by Mr Man »

The "authority" is somthing that we give. How we decide could be determined by our position as a scholar/historian or a "practitioner" or a a combination. Consensus is the acceptable face of delusion.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Mr Man wrote:The "authority" is somthing that we give. How we decide could be determined by our position as a scholar/historian or a "practitioner" or a a combination. Consensus is the acceptable face of delusion.
Agreed.

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."
User avatar
Polar Bear
Posts: 1348
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:39 am

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by Polar Bear »

It seems rather reasonable to assume that there was a historical buddha, and reasonable to assume that teachings repeated consistently throughout the suttas came from him. Basically, the 8 fold path, noble truths, dependent origination, are almost certainly in my mind the teachings of a guy named Gotama from roughly 2500 years ago. And I think the sutta pitaka and the vinaya pitaka are the foremost authorities on what counts as buddha dhamma, with the suttas being more important than the vinaya. Afterall, the vinaya wasn't formulated until the sangha got too big to be full of only good bhikkhus.
"I don't envision a single thing that, when developed & cultivated, leads to such great benefit as the mind. The mind, when developed & cultivated, leads to great benefit."

"I don't envision a single thing that, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about such suffering & stress as the mind. The mind, when undeveloped & uncultivated, brings about suffering & stress."
User avatar
Doshin
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 8:01 am

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by Doshin »

polarbuddha101 wrote:...

How do we decide what was most likely spoken by the historical buddha and what was not? Mind you, let us not make slippery slope arguments.
When is it important to know ?

As a practitioner, I don't care, as I only take things as true, if I through insight find them to be true (to me).

If ones approach is academic/historical, its another discussion, but that is not my approach to Buddhism.

Gassho,
Doshin
Knowing about dhamma, does not imply knowing dhamma
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by Kim OHara »

polarbuddha101 wrote:It seems rather reasonable to assume that there was a historical buddha, and reasonable to assume that teachings repeated consistently throughout the suttas came from him. Basically, the 8 fold path, noble truths, dependent origination, are almost certainly in my mind the teachings of a guy named Gotama from roughly 2500 years ago. And I think the sutta pitaka and the vinaya pitaka are the foremost authorities on what counts as buddha dhamma, with the suttas being more important than the vinaya. Afterall, the vinaya wasn't formulated until the sangha got too big to be full of only good bhikkhus.
I don't disagree (much) with much of that. :tongue: The trouble is that you could easily find twenty people who would each disagree with a different combination of those sentences. That being so, Mr Man's position seems pretty reasonable.

:juggling:
Kim
User avatar
DAWN
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by DAWN »

For the moment, all what is said in suttas by The Blessed One, is true, and can by verified directly, without standing up from the sit. And without using UFO technologies :alien: :tongue:
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10157
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by Spiny Norman »

polarbuddha101 wrote:A quote from Danielion:
Did the Buddha teach that the suttas are a valid source of authority?

Corollary: are the suttas a proper object for a Buddhist to have faith in?

Add the rapidly growing body of historical-critical scholarship into the mix, and we have a sobering effect on those who believe in the authoritative nature of the texts.
How do we decide what was most likely spoken by the historical buddha and what was not? Mind you, let us not make slippery slope arguments.
My working assumption is that the suttas are a reasonable approximation of what the Buddha taught, but if clear evidence to the contrary emerged I would reconsider. I've read people like Sue Hamilton and Richard Gombrich, some interesting ideas but IMO not very conclusive.
In the meantime I use the suttas partly to develop my understanding of Buddhist teachings, partly to assess the ideas of contemporary teachers, and partly to inform my own practice.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
suttametta
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 2:55 pm

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by suttametta »

Kalama Sutta: Test it out for yourself. If it comes out that way for you too, then you know the text is authoritative. It's not that important who said it, unless of course you believe only Buddha knew what he was talking about and then cannot accept anything unless it was said by him. A writer from the 19th Century, George Grimm, posited many speculations about what was said by Buddha and what was made up by monks. Many Western dharma scholars are caught on this hook. These are the sad cases of those who do not speak from experience. Much dharma information becomes self-evident on the path. It's not only the historical Gautama who will understand things. He taught the path, so of course he created the lineage of future Buddhas. You see in the past 2500 years how many people were enlightened? Millions.
alan
Posts: 3111
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by alan »

The suttas are our guide, and you should read them.
User avatar
Kusala
Posts: 1147
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:02 am

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by Kusala »

polarbuddha101 wrote:A quote from Danielion:
Did the Buddha teach that the suttas are a valid source of authority?

Corollary: are the suttas a proper object for a Buddhist to have faith in?

Add the rapidly growing body of historical-critical scholarship into the mix, and we have a sobering effect on those who believe in the authoritative nature of the texts.
How do we decide what was most likely spoken by the historical buddha and what was not? Mind you, let us not make slippery slope arguments.
“Buddhism would remain what it is even if it were proved that the Buddha never lived.”

- Christmas Humphreys, "Buddhism"
"He, the Blessed One, is indeed the Noble Lord, the Perfectly Enlightened One;
He is impeccable in conduct and understanding, the Serene One, the Knower of the Worlds;
He trains perfectly those who wish to be trained; he is Teacher of gods and men; he is Awake and Holy. "

--------------------------------------------
"The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One,
Apparent here and now, timeless, encouraging investigation,
Leading to liberation, to be experienced individually by the wise. "
alan
Posts: 3111
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by alan »

Completely incorrect!
Buddhism exists because of what he taught, and it is recorded in the suttas.
Why is this even a point of discussion?
pegembara
Posts: 3465
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by pegembara »

How do we decide what was most likely spoken by the historical buddha and what was not? Mind you, let us not make slippery slope arguments.
Gotami Sutta

I have heard that at one time the Blessed One was staying at Vesali, in the Peaked Roof Hall in the Great Forest.

Then Mahapajapati Gotami went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, stood to one side. As she was standing there she said to him: "It would be good, lord, if the Blessed One would teach me the Dhamma in brief such that, having heard the Dhamma from the Blessed One, I might dwell alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, & resolute."

"Gotami, the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher's instruction.'

"As for the qualities of which you may know, 'These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome': You may categorically hold, 'This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher's instruction.'"

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Mahapajapati Gotami delighted at his words.
Last edited by pegembara on Sat Dec 01, 2012 10:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10157
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by Spiny Norman »

suttametta wrote:Kalama Sutta: Test it out for yourself. If it comes out that way for you too, then you know the text is authoritative.
I'm not sure that's a reliable guide because according to the suttas we're all deluded anyway. ;)
Buddha save me from new-agers!
danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: On the authority of the suttas.

Post by danieLion »

alan wrote:The suttas are our guide, and you should read them.
So, we should revere them like Jews do the Torah, or like Christians do the Bible, or like Muslims do the Koran, or like Mormons do The Book of Mormon, Doctrine of Covenants and Pearl of Great Price?

You can't prove they're inerrant or deserve to be called a Canon. And if you can't prove that, you have no basis for your "thou shalt" ("should').

I read and study them because I want to. The moment I believe I should read them is the moment I turn my religion into a prison.
Post Reply