Who can be the teacher of effacement?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
starter
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:56 pm

Re: Who can be the teacher of effacement?

Post by starter »

Greetings!

I recently happened to hear MN 9, and noticed that Ven. Sariputta was addressed as "Friend" by the other practitioners, instead of "Teacher" or "Master", when he was teaching them.

"Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was living at Sāvatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika’s Park. There the venerable Sāriputta addressed the bhikkhus thus: “Friends, bhikkhus.”—“Friend,” they replied. The venerable Sāriputta said this:

“‘One of right view, one of right view,’ is said, friends. In what way is a noble disciple one of right view, whose view is straight, who has unwavering confidence in the Dhamma, and has arrived at this true Dhamma?”

“Indeed, friend, we would come from far away to learn from the venerable Sāriputta the meaning of this statement. It would be good if the venerable Sāriputta would explain the meaning of this statement. Having heard it from him, the bhikkhus will remember it.”

“Then, friends, listen and attend closely to what I shall say.”

“Yes, friend,” the bhikkhus replied..."

I linked this with the following (and other) teaching and came to the belief that at the Buddha's time, only the Buddha was named/considered the teacher, all the arahant disciples that the Buddha allowed to teach were not named/considered teacher but rather friend:

"Now the Blessed One spoke to the Venerable Ananda, saying: "It may be, Ananda, that to some among you the thought will come: 'Ended is the word of the Teacher; we have a Teacher no longer.' But it should not, Ananda, be so considered. For that which I have proclaimed and made known as the Dhamma and the Discipline, that shall be your Teacher when I am gone." (MN 16)

It's a pity that such vitally important tradition had somehow gotten lost among the Buddha's followers, and various disciples became "masters"/"teachers" of the Dhamma, who taught/teach their own teachings or their own interpretation of the Buddha's teaching which, as I mentioned before, led to the disappearance of the Dhamma in some countries and the disappearance (?) of genuine arahants.

I believe that it's very important and necessary to reestablish the tradition to call/consider only the Buddha as the "Teacher", and all others as "Friend". This will help remind both the teachers and the students to use the Four Great Referrals to judge what to follow, and what not to follow.

Your input would be appreciated. Metta to all!
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Who can be the teacher of effacement?

Post by binocular »

starter wrote:It's a pity that such vitally important tradition had somehow gotten lost among the Buddha's followers, and various disciples became "masters"/"teachers" of the Dhamma, who taught/teach their own teachings or their own interpretation of the Buddha's teaching which, as I mentioned before, led to the disappearance of the Dhamma in some countries and the disappearance (?) of genuine arahants.

I believe that it's very important and necessary to reestablish the tradition to call/consider only the Buddha as the "Teacher", and all others as "Friend". This will help remind both the teachers and the students to use the Four Great Referrals to judge what to follow, and what not to follow.
This kind of phenomenon appears in most major religions: when the founder of a religion passes away, all that is left are the scriptures, and numerous people each of whom claims to have the one and only right understanding (or at least the most right understanding) of the scriptures and of what the founder meant. And then these people argue with eachother (and anyone else who comes along) ...
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
starter
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:56 pm

Re: Who can be the teacher of effacement?

Post by starter »

binocular wrote:
starter wrote:It's a pity that such vitally important tradition had somehow gotten lost among the Buddha's followers, and various disciples became "masters"/"teachers" of the Dhamma, who taught/teach their own teachings or their own interpretation of the Buddha's teaching which, as I mentioned before, led to the disappearance of the Dhamma in some countries and the disappearance (?) of genuine arahants.

I believe that it's very important and necessary to reestablish the tradition to call/consider only the Buddha as the "Teacher", and all others as "Friend". This will help remind both the teachers and the students to use the Four Great Referrals to judge what to follow, and what not to follow.
This kind of phenomenon appears in most major religions: when the founder of a religion passes away, all that is left are the scriptures, and numerous people each of whom claims to have the one and only right understanding (or at least the most right understanding) of the scriptures and of what the founder meant. And then these people argue with eachother (and anyone else who comes along) ...
I agree. Nevertheless, if the tradition to call/consider only the Buddha as the "Teacher" and all others as "Friend" can be reestablished, then at least the suttas will be used as the ultimate guide for the practitioners, instead of each teacher's own words. But now it's commonly accepted/believed that the teachers' words ("Dhamma") should be followed, without using the Four Great Referrals, as I see it. It reminds me the story of a long row of blinded men, one after another, led by a blinded man; but I'd change "blinded" into "with eyes closed" -- in this case, they only need to open their eyes to the Buddha's words, instead of following a "blinded" leader.

Metta to all!

Metta to all!
culaavuso
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: Who can be the teacher of effacement?

Post by culaavuso »

starter wrote:But now it's commonly accepted/believed that the teachers' words ("Dhamma") should be followed, without using the Four Great Referrals, as I see it.
DN 16: Maha-parinibbana Sutta wrote: But in any doctrine & discipline where the noble eightfold path is found, contemplatives of the first... second... third... fourth order are found.
AN 8.53: Gotami Sutta wrote: 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.'
MN 135: Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta wrote: This is the way leading to discernment: when visiting a brahman or contemplative, to ask: 'What is skillful, venerable sir? What is unskillful? What is blameworthy? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? Or what, having been done by me, will be for my long-term welfare & happiness?'
There are also records of the Buddha teaching others how to teach so the Sangha could continue the tradition. His instructions explain who he viewed as qualified to teach the Dhamma.
AN 5.159: Udayi Sutta wrote: Ven. Ananda saw Ven. Udayin sitting surrounded by a large assembly of householders, teaching the Dhamma, and on seeing him went to the Blessed One. On arrival, he bowed down to the Blessed One and sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Ven. Udayin, lord, is sitting surrounded by a large assembly of householders, teaching the Dhamma."

"It's not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ananda. The Dhamma should be taught to others only when five qualities are established within the person teaching. Which five?

"[1] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak step-by-step.'

"[2] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak explaining the sequence [of cause & effect].'

"[3] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak out of compassion.'

"[4] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak not for the purpose of material reward.'

"[5] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak without hurting myself or others.'

"It's not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ananda. The Dhamma should be taught to others only when these five qualities are established within the person teaching."
starter
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:56 pm

Re: Who can be the teacher of effacement?

Post by starter »

culaavuso wrote:
starter wrote:But now it's commonly accepted/believed that the teachers' words ("Dhamma") should be followed, without using the Four Great Referrals, as I see it.
DN 16: Maha-parinibbana Sutta wrote: But in any doctrine & discipline where the noble eightfold path is found, contemplatives of the first... second... third... fourth order are found.
-- But immediately following this introduction in DN 16, the Buddha had explicitly indicated that only in his doctrine and discipline there is the noble eightfold path:

"In this Teaching and Discipline, Subhadda, the Noble Eightfold Path is found, here a true ascetic is found, here a second true ascetic is found, here a third true ascetic is found, here a fourth true ascetic is found.

Void are the outside doctrines of these other ascetics, Subhadda, but if [the Buddha's] monks should live well, the world will not be void of Worthy Ones.

AN 8.53: Gotami Sutta wrote: 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.'
-- I'd think "qualities" (Dhamma?) here should probably be replaced by "teaching", and this sutta was probably meant to teach Ven. Gotami to discriminate which teaching is the true Dhamma and Vinaya spoken by the Buddha so that she could practice accordingly, and which ones are not. It seems that even during the Buddha's time, there were already falsely/mistakenly spread words of the Buddha. Since only the Buddha was THE Teacher at that time and the Buddha clearly defined the Dhamma and Vinaya as his words (or equivalent to his words as spoken by his arahant disciples), I don't think that this sutta meant to teach us we should accept others' teaching as THE Dhamma/Vinaya.

We should also consider Ven Gotami's introduction in this sutta:

"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".

It's clear that Ven Gotami was not to follow any other teacher (including the arahant disciples) but only the Buddha's words to practice alone in seclusion. Thus I also don't think this sutta meant to teach us to accept our teachers' words as the Dhamma/Vinaya.

MN 135: Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta wrote: This is the way leading to discernment: when visiting a brahman or contemplative, to ask: 'What is skillful, venerable sir? What is unskillful? What is blameworthy? What is blameless? What should be cultivated? What should not be cultivated? Or what, having been done by me, will be for my long-term welfare & happiness?'
There are also records of the Buddha teaching others how to teach so the Sangha could continue the tradition. His instructions explain who he viewed as qualified to teach the Dhamma.
AN 5.159: Udayi Sutta wrote: Ven. Ananda saw Ven. Udayin sitting surrounded by a large assembly of householders, teaching the Dhamma, and on seeing him went to the Blessed One. On arrival, he bowed down to the Blessed One and sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Ven. Udayin, lord, is sitting surrounded by a large assembly of householders, teaching the Dhamma."

"It's not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ananda. The Dhamma should be taught to others only when five qualities are established within the person teaching. Which five?

"[1] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak step-by-step.'

"[2] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak explaining the sequence [of cause & effect].'

"[3] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak out of compassion.'

"[4] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak not for the purpose of material reward.'

"[5] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak without hurting myself or others.'

"It's not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ananda. The Dhamma should be taught to others only when these five qualities are established within the person teaching."
-- As I mentioned in a previous post, I tend to think that "the sequence [of cause & effect]" should probably be "the sequence of [the path/practice]", since the sequence of course and effect is already included in [1] the step-by-step theoretical talk. If it were only the sequence of cause & effect, teachers from many other doctrines could teach the Dhamma since they understood karma.

The point I'm trying to make is not that we should not have teachers OR the disciples should not teach, but that both the teachers and students should use the Four Grand Referrals to judge if the teachings are in accordance with the Dhamma/Vinaya, and these teachings are not the words of the Buddha.

Thanks and metta!
starter
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:56 pm

Re: Who can be the teacher of effacement?

Post by starter »

Greetings!

After studying AN 5.159 Udayi Sutta and MN 24. Ratha-vinita Sutta (Relay Chariots), I'd like to add that to my understanding only a stream winner (the 2nd of the 8 types of noble disciples) who has gained the path knowledge (step 6 in MN 24) and possess the other four qualities can teach the Dhamma to others. Of course those who haven't possessed these five qualities can always point others to the Dhamma and Vinaya. :anjali:

AN 5.159: Udayi Sutta [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html]

"It's not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ananda. The Dhamma should be taught to others only when five qualities are established within the person teaching. Which five?

"[1] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak step-by-step.' [For the Buddha's typical step-by-step teaching see Ud 5.3: Kuṭṭhi Sutta; to my understanding the step-by-step talk is more concerning the theoretical understanding, instead of the actual practice]

"[2] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak explaining the sequence [of the path/practice] (I changed the sequence "of the course and effect" into the sequence "of the path/practice", since the sequence of course and effect is included in the step-by-step theoretical talk; if the Buddha meant explaining course and effect, then he would more likely directly say "course and effect", instead of just saying "the sequence").'

"[3] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak out of compassion.'

"[4] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak not for the purpose of material reward.'

"[5] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak without hurting myself or others.'

MN 24. Ratha-vinita Sutta: Relay Chariots

[The following translation and "commentary" are based upon my personal understanding:]

“… In the same manner (as the relay of chariots),

[1] sīlavisuddhi (precepts/morality purity) is for citta­visuddhatthā (mind purification [samadhi]),

[2] citta-visuddhi (mind purity) is for diṭṭhi-visuddhatthā (view purification [Understanding the three characteristics (anicca/dukkha/anatta) and breaking of the fetter of self view]),

[3] diṭṭhi-visuddhi (view purity) is for kaṅkhāvitaraṇa-visuddhatthā (doubt-overcoming purification [breaking the fetter of doubt about the Buddha and the Dhamma]),

[4] kaṅkhāvitaraṇa-visuddhi (purity from doubt) is for maggāmaggañāṇadassana­ visuddhatthā (purification of path/non-path knowledge [gaining the noble right view of the 4NT in one of the three ways and four of the twelve folds, breaking the fetter of grasping sila and rituals]),

[5] and maggāmaggañāṇadassana­visuddhi (purity of path/non-path knowledge) is for paṭipadāñāṇadassana-visuddhatthā (purification of knowledge of the [NOBLE 8-fold] path),

[6] paṭipadāñāṇadassana-visuddhi (purity of knowledge of the path) is for ñāṇadassana-visuddhatthā (purification of [liberating] knowledge and insight [comprehension of the four noble truths in three ways and twelve folds & cessation of ignorance]),

[7] ñāṇadassana-visuddhi (purity of knowledge and insight) is for final Nibbana without grasping.

It is for Nibbana without grasping that the holy life is lived in the dispensation of the Blessed One.”
Post Reply