"The Buddha did not teach it..."

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby daverupa » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:59 pm

cooran wrote:I dont think this is a ''touchy-feely universalist'' thing - but involves resting the mind temporarily on particular individuals or groups of beings.
What do you reckon?


viewtopic.php?f=41&t=15936&p=227787#p227787

Have a look; maybe this tangent can be pursued there, or anew with respect to "is it in the suttas" in terms of this sort of thing.

:heart:
    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.
- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
daverupa
 
Posts: 4062
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby Mr Man » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:20 pm

Following on from zavk's post.
I think that where we have a great opportunity to come into contact with the living teaching of the Buddha is through the Sangha, who have been keeping vinaya. This sangha is the legacy of the Buddha and the connection. Of cause we still need to be circumspect and use intelligence as well as referring to sutta/commentaries.
User avatar
Mr Man
 
Posts: 1188
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby whynotme » Sun Feb 03, 2013 8:39 pm

Dan74 wrote:Going over an old thread I saw this statement and the conclusion that therefore it is of no relevance. This logic appears to be quite common here and I'd like to query it in this thread, if I may.

Firstly, how can we be confident that every single teaching the Buddha gave has been recorded and passed down? I mean 45 years worth of teaching? Do we think we have it all??
Given that the earliest existing Pali document dates to about 1000 years after the Buddha's parinibbana, I think this is a big leap of faith.

Secondly, supposing that the Buddha really did not teach something (like the Ajahn Sumedho's Sound of Silence meditation for example). Does this mean it is irrelevant and of no use? This to me seems a big leap of logic. Surely we are a product of quite a different culture and quite a different conditioning to the audience the Buddha faced. Wouldn't it follow that some methods would be more appropriate today than they would've been 2500 years ago in India? A master may follow the Dhamma, attain liberation and elaborate the Buddha's teaching for his disciples in his (or her) own way appropriate to the culture and the audience.

Thoughts?

My opinion

Firstly, we should not be confident about something till we know/see it for sure. If a man sees something by his own eyes, he is not confident/ not not confident, just simply knows it. Only the one doesn't see the reality would be confident in his belief.

The dhamma is for seeing/knowing, not for gaining ego/confidence

Also, even the Nikaya is true, there are chances that one may misinterprets what the Buddha said/ chances that comments are wrong and a lot of things like that. I believe an enlightened one (if they are) would read/view/interpret the Nikayas very different to normal people. It is like soldiers who were actually experienced war will view it very different to TV/movie/documents viewers even they view the same material.

Secondly, another mistake I saw people usually makes it that, OK, something worked then they assumed it will work on every different situations. I don't know what is sound of silence you mentioned, and assumed it worked for some people, then THEY SHOULD KNOW THAT, this technique worked in this very situation on this very condition. Don't be a fool to assumed that if a technique worked then the teacher is enlightened and that technique the right way to nirvana. Maybe a technique leads to a better position faster but it will block other long term achievements, be wise and be careful about that and know the technique's limit.

In the end, judging and choosing skills are the tools, also your kamma.

Regards.
Please stop following me
whynotme
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby Sokehi » Sun Feb 03, 2013 10:24 pm

gendun wrote:
hermitwin wrote:You have a valid point.
we cant even be sure who said what a few seconds ago,
unless it was recorded on video or audio.
but even audio/video can be manipulated.

yet, the pali canon is the best available record of
buddha;s teachings that we have.
if you discard the pali canon, what are you left with?

ultimately, the proof of the pudding is in the practice
and the results.

but if you ask me, i always trust the pali canon more than
any teacher in this world.

Horses for courses surely ?
Personally I find The Pali Canon so geared to a particular time and culture so as to render it of little use...to me. I need the interpretative skills of a teacher to make it live...for me.


Same for me... I've read the complete middle length discourses and though this is a agreeable enterprise I prefer a teacher to help out with his interpretations. Thankfully we have quite good access to many of them todays.
Get the wanting out of waiting

What does womanhood matter at all, when the mind is concentrated well, when knowledge flows on steadily as one sees correctly into Dhamma. One to whom it might occur, ‘I am a woman’ or ‘I am a man’ or ‘I’m anything at all’ is fit for Mara to address. – SN 5.2

If they take what's yours, tell yourself that you're making it a gift.
Otherwise there will be no end to the animosity. - Ajahn Fuang Jotiko

https://www.youtube.com/user/Repeataarrr
User avatar
Sokehi
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:27 pm
Location: Germany

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby Spiny Norman » Mon Feb 04, 2013 9:28 am

Sokehi wrote:Same for me... I've read the complete middle length discourses and though this is a agreeable enterprise I prefer a teacher to help out with his interpretations. Thankfully we have quite good access to many of them todays.


The difficulty is that there is no concensus among the teachers...so it comes down to who one believes.
Well, oi dunno...
User avatar
Spiny Norman
 
Posts: 2177
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby Sokehi » Mon Feb 04, 2013 1:10 pm

porpoise wrote:
Sokehi wrote:Same for me... I've read the complete middle length discourses and though this is a agreeable enterprise I prefer a teacher to help out with his interpretations. Thankfully we have quite good access to many of them todays.


The difficulty is that there is no concensus among the teachers...so it comes down to who one believes.


I absolutely agree... but still... we've got to know it for ourselves... and everyone else is just a translator of that 2500 year old tradition. I don't necessarilly believe anyone, but if I feel inspired and I notice that "it" works or helps with my practice, increases wellbeing and the ability to let go... than it must be good.
Get the wanting out of waiting

What does womanhood matter at all, when the mind is concentrated well, when knowledge flows on steadily as one sees correctly into Dhamma. One to whom it might occur, ‘I am a woman’ or ‘I am a man’ or ‘I’m anything at all’ is fit for Mara to address. – SN 5.2

If they take what's yours, tell yourself that you're making it a gift.
Otherwise there will be no end to the animosity. - Ajahn Fuang Jotiko

https://www.youtube.com/user/Repeataarrr
User avatar
Sokehi
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:27 pm
Location: Germany

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby mikenz66 » Mon Feb 04, 2013 6:34 pm

porpoise wrote:The difficulty is that there is no concensus among the teachers...so it comes down to who one believes.

In the case of personal contact with Theravada teachers, my experience is that many of the apparent disagreements tend to evaporate.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10112
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby whynotme » Thu Feb 14, 2013 7:40 pm

Whether the buddha taught it or not, just follow the kalama sutta (the whole sutta, not the first commonly quoted part)

Regards
Please stop following me
whynotme
 
Posts: 388
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby mogg » Wed Apr 24, 2013 7:52 am

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Proving that the Buddha didn't teach something is harder than showing that he did, but there is one method you can use, as he taught to his foster mother, Mahapajapati Gotami:

“Those things, Gotamī, regarding which you know, ‘These things lead to dispassion, not to passion; to liberation, not to bondage; to relinquishment, not to accumulation; to having few wishes, not to having many wishes; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to association; to arousing energy, not to laziness; to being easy to support, not to being hard to support,’ definitely, Gotamī, you can decide, ‘This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher’s instruction.’”

Debating about what the Buddha taught or did not teach often leads to passion, not to dispassion.

:goodpost:
mogg
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:44 am

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby alan » Wed Apr 24, 2013 3:10 pm

Hi Dan.
Mining the old "Maybe there is something he didn't say" vein again? There is nothing to find.

As I'm sure you know, the Buddha said he was not holding anything back. The Pali Canon is vast, and often repetitive. If there was an idea spoken by the Buddha of any consequence, it's in there. Remember, people were following him around listening to his every word. If you insist there was a secret teaching, you'll have to come up with a reasonable scenario to explain it. And you can't.

If you want to talk about logic, you should start by following the rules of logic. No "leap of faith" is required to accept the veracity of the suttas. Perhaps you are leaping into the unknown, by presuming there is an answer which better suites your desires?
alan
 
Posts: 2495
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby binocular » Wed Apr 24, 2013 3:30 pm

Dan74 wrote:Firstly, how can we be confident that every single teaching the Buddha gave has been recorded and passed down? I mean 45 years worth of teaching? Do we think we have it all??
Given that the earliest existing Pali document dates to about 1000 years after the Buddha's parinibbana, I think this is a big leap of faith.

Secondly, supposing that the Buddha really did not teach something (like the Ajahn Sumedho's Sound of Silence meditation for example). Does this mean it is irrelevant and of no use? This to me seems a big leap of logic. Surely we are a product of quite a different culture and quite a different conditioning to the audience the Buddha faced. Wouldn't it follow that some methods would be more appropriate today than they would've been 2500 years ago in India? A master may follow the Dhamma, attain liberation and elaborate the Buddha's teaching for his disciples in his (or her) own way appropriate to the culture and the audience.

Thoughts?


Why is it an issue whether the Buddha taught something or not?

What is attempted to be accomplished by claiming "The Buddha taught this"?

What is attempted to be accomplished by claiming "The Buddha did not teach this"?


When people fight over what the Buddha taught or didn't teach, it seems to generally be about power trips and one-upmanship.

Although in one sense, a person living in modern times has to learn to deal with such things too, given there are so many fights over what the Buddha taught or didn't teach, and fights over what counts for Buddhism and what doesn't.
binocular
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby alan » Wed Apr 24, 2013 3:40 pm

It's an issue, binocular, when people use it as an excuse to invent their own interpretations of the Dhamma.
alan
 
Posts: 2495
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: "The Buddha did not teach it..."

Postby binocular » Wed Apr 24, 2013 3:45 pm

alan wrote:It's an issue, binocular, when people use it as an excuse to invent their own interpretations of the Dhamma.


Well, it's not just about inventing their own interpretations of the Dhamma, but moreso about expecting to be considered rightfully self-enlightened.

:embarassed:
binocular
 
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Previous

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: clw_uk and 17 guests