Ananda's appeal to the Buddha in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta

[piotr]

Hi,

this links to what peter said also, why did Mahakasapa continue to practice the way he did? why do Arahants continue to meditate after ataining Nibbana?
as an example of the path, I believe it is said to be the reason!

Jinna-sutta: Old (SN 16.5)

[kc2dpt]

You are of course fully entitled to laugh and despise, and to believe every word you find in a book.

The rest of us are entitled to heed the good advice of the Kalama Sutta.

I don't recall the Kalama Sutta advising us to make unsupported accusations against people. What I recall the Kalama Sutta advising is to put the teachings into practice and see for yourself if they are true. What that has to do with making up wild theories as to why the teachings might not be true I cannot fathom.

To put it another way...

Contrary to popular belief, the Kalama Sutta is not the Buddha saying "Feel free to reject any teaching you don't care for or don't understand."

[karuna_murti]

I know a translation, complete, and well translated, but in Indonesian
Also I remember all Sammasambuddha have a tradition not to live equal to human lifespan at Their era. In our case, human lifespan is 100 years, which means Buddha Gotama already know He will parinibanna when He is 80 years old.
That makes an interesting case, either Buddhavamsa and it's commentaries is not accurate, or Mahaparinibanna is not accurate. As if Buddha playing drama against Ananda.

[Fede]

I dunno....It seems overly harsh to me that the Buddha would chastise his own cousin and attendant in such a manner....
How awful Ananda must have felt to be advised that simply because he never saw the signals, nor took any initiative, his pleas would therefore fall on deaf ears....

I can see how the passage is doubted as being authentic and direct...., because one of the Buddha's primary lessons (other than teaching suffering and the end of suffering) is Brahma-Vihara - the cultivation of Compassion (Karuna), Loving kindness (metta), equanimity ( upekkha) and sympathetic Joy (mudita).....

(see? I do listen....)

here, he sounds like an old grouch.....

[kc2dpt]

There are many suttas where he sounds like an old grouch. It's not unusual. Then again, we do not see his face nor hear his voice. As anyone who has spent a decent amount of time online will tell you, text often comes across harsher than live speech.

[Ben]

Hi Kare

The texts are not stenographical reports of what was said and done at the actual moment. They are probably based on real events and real sayings, but they were edited before collected into Nikayas and later written down.
Sometimes the Commentaries mention the editors, as for instance in the Therigatha Commentary: Imā tisso gāthā saṅgītikārehi ṭhapitā, "These three verses were added by the editors". Here, saṅgītikārehi refers to the editors.
When reading the Pali Texts, we should remember that they have been passing through the hands of editors, and we should also ask ourselves what motives the editors may have had for inserting passages or editing the text into the shape that has reached us.
We know that Ananda had an important position. He was the personal assistant of the Buddha, which means that he always had access to him, and, still more important, he could grant or bar access to the Master for others.
How did other monks react to this? Did some of them feel envy? Did some of them grasp the opportunity for revenge by inserting passages in the Mahaparinibbanasutta intending to blame Ananda for the death of the Buddha?
It is difficult to say for sure, ... ... but my personal feeling is that these passages may be the result of editors having a chip on their shoulder against Ananda.

Do you have any evidence that supports your argument? If so, I would appreciate it you could share it with us.
Thanks

Ben

[Fede]

There are many suttas where he sounds like an old grouch. It's not unusual. Then again, we do not see his face nor hear his voice. As anyone who has spent a decent amount of time online will tell you, text often comes across harsher than live speech.

Yes, quite......

[DNS]

After the Buddha's passing, it appears that some monks were jealous of Ananda, because of his close relationship with the Buddha.

All the directions are obscure, The teachings are not clear to me; With our benevolent friend gone, It seems as if all is darkness. For one whose friend has passed away, One whose teacher is gone for good, There is no friend that can compare With mindfulness of the body. The old ones have all passed away; I do not fit in with the new. And so today I muse alone Like a bird who has gone to roost.

Ananda from: Theragatha 17.3

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .olen.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But this was by some monks, not all. The arahants at the First Council were . . . arahants and thus, free from envy and jealousy.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

But this was by some monks, not all. The arahants at the First Council were . . . arahants and thus, free from envy and jealousy.

Yes. This was the main reason why I thought Kare's theory was interesting and thought-provoking, but that I couldn't sign up to it personally.

Metta,
Retro.

[Ben]

Hi David
Forgive me, but I don't read a sense of others' jealousy in Ananda's verses.
He seems to be saying that no one is comparable to the Buddha, no friend can compare with his practice, and his sense of separateness from the 'new ones'.
His sense of separateness could be as a result of his own growing spiritual development and not some inter-personal tension. If I were to describe what I feel when confronted with the vast majority of humanity that I meet - it would be very close to:

There is no friend that can compare With mindfulness of [vedana]. The old ones have all passed away; I do not fit in with the new. And so today I muse alone Like a bird who has gone to roost.

To me, the declaration is incredibly profound and speaks of the experience of walking on the path.

There are also overtones above of the verse popularly known as 'the rhinoceros sutra'

bhayea mitra paḍibhaṇavaṃta
baho-ṣuda dhaṃma-dhara uraḍa
(*annae dhammaṃ vi)yigitsa prahae
ek(*o care khargaviṣaṇagapo)


One should cultivate a friend who is intelligent,
learned, a master of the dharma, noble.
(*Having understood the dharma)
[and] abandoned doubt, (*one should wander) alone (*like the rhinoceros.)

sayi labhea ṇivago sahayo
sardhacare sas̱ovihari dhiro
(*abhibhuya) sarvaṇi pariṣeaṇi
carea ten' atamaṇa svad(*ima')


If one should find a wise companion,
a well-behaved, strong fellow,
[then] (*overcoming) all dangers,
one should wander along with him, satisfied at heart, mindful.

ṇo ya labhea ṇivag(*o) sahayo
sardhacare sas̱ovihari dhiro
(*raya va ratha) viyidaṃ prahae
eko care khargaviṣaṇagap(*o)


If one should not find a wise companion,
a well-behaved, strong fellow,
[then] (*like a king who) has abandoned (*the realm) [which he had] conquered,
one should wander alone like the rhinoceros.

-- Gandari version of the Rhinoceros Sutra: http://www.ebmp.org/p_wrk_samples.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Having said that, I do not compare myself with Ananda nor his achievements.
Metta

Ben

[DNS]

Hi Ben,

It is in Andrew Olendzki's 'translator's intro' at the access to insight link:

After the Buddha's final passing Ananda seems to have been treated somewhat badly by some of the other monks, who were jealous of his close relationship with the master. Poems like this one suggest that Ananda passed a lonely old age and never ceased mourning for his beloved teacher and friend.

I'm not sure if he is basing it off of just that passage from Ananda or if there is more supporting evidence for that in the Commentaries.

[tiltbillings]

Hi David
Forgive me, but I don't read a sense of others' jealousy in Ananda's verses.

If you have Ven Nanamoli's LIFE OF THE BUDDHA, (I'm at work so I do not have it hand) look at the final chapters where there is an interesting if not unpleasant inteeraction between Ven Kassapa and Ananda.

[Ben]

Thanks Tilt
I don't have a copy of Life of the Buddha. Perhaps its about time I put it on the reading list.
I do remember Hecker - or perhaps Nyanaponika Thera telling the story of how Maha Kassapa gave Ananda a great shelacking one day in the presence of younger monks. But if memory served me well it was due to the behaviour of a young nun who was just a little bit naughty in the Melrose Place kinda way. Because of Ananda's close relationships, particularly with the nuns, and because (I think the young nun attempted to invoke the influence of Ananda) he copped a verbal whalloping from Mahakassapa.
Though i could be wrong - my copy of Great Disciples of the Buddhais packed up with the rest of my dhamma books prior to our move this Friday.
Metta

Ben

[DNS]

Bhikkhuni Thullatissa remarked, "How could the Revered Kassapa presume to speak Dhamma in the presence of the Revered Ananda, the learned sage? This is as if a needle peddler wanted to sell a needle to the needle maker."

When Kassapa heard the nun's remarks, he asked Ananda: "How is it, friend Ananda, am I the needle peddler and you the needle maker, or am I the needle maker and you the needle peddler?"

Ananda replied: "Be indulgent, venerable sir. She is foolish woman.

"Beware, friend Ananda, or else the Sangha may further examine you. How is it, friend Ananda, was it you to whom the Exalted One referred in the presence of the Sangha when saying: 'I, O monks, can attain at will the four fine-material and immaterial meditative absorptions, the cessation of perception and feeling, the six supernormal knowledges; and Ananda, too, can so attain'?"

"Not so, venerable sir."

"Or was it that he said: 'Kassapa, too, can so attain'?"

SN 16.10

[Individual]

Greetings,

I'm trying to work out the significance of the following passage from DN16.

Is there some lesson to be learned from it? Why would the Buddha drop hints, only to effectively go "too bad, so sad" once Ananda worked out what the Buddha was hinting about.

I don't see the sense in it, and am confused here about the Buddha's intentions (assuming of course that it is a legitimate passage... Maurice Walshe raises some serious doubts about the legitimacy of certain passages of this sutta).

I think that analyzing the suttas too much can lead one to doubt their veracity or the Buddha's virtue. However, with the great preponderance of humor and satire, in sharp contrast to the later Buddhist writings, it seems plausible that much of the suttas were not historically accurate but neither were they intentional lies either.

To explain what I mean, it's important to understand the mindset of early human beings. Early in human history, there wasn't a very sharp distinction between fiction and non-fiction. When people would write stuff down or create stories, they would blend fact with fiction, not for malicious reasons but because that's just the way things were. Either fiction was passed off as fact because it was something received by word-of-mouth and subject to exaggeration, or they intentionally engaged in creative improvement of what they already knew... to make the stories better or to glorify the subject matter. What they were doing may have actually been known but nobody cared because it was a good story. Aside from Buddhist texts, you see examples of this in the Bible and among the Greek poets.

And the telling of stories serves an important social role that cannot be fulfilled if such stories are strictly fiction or non-fiction. If the stories we share are strictly fiction, they aren't taken as seriously; they aren't regarded as applicable to experience. But if such stories are strictly fiction, they do not catch the reader's attention, there may be substance lacking, so the message isn't as clear. Imagine how the world might be a bit different if people regarded Aesop's fables as fact. But on the other hand, let's imagine how the world's religions might be a bit different if they were aware of any of the flaws of their founders or the various inaccuracies there might be.

Fictional media, like books and media, serves a similar role of defining virtues, creating a framework for worldview, and a path for self-fulfillment, but it's often not quite specifically targeted at that (think of how many movies are crap) and even if it is, it isn't taken as seriously because it's seen as mere entertainment. Non-fiction, though, is generally boring and depressing.

A person might find fault with this, saying that the truth is the truth is the truth, and yet psychologists will tell you that the faculty of memory is as much a creative process as it is recollective. Should we be as neurotically obsessed over "what really happened," with regards to our personal lives too? That is, can we not trust or value the human memory because memories are at least partly re-created and not merely recalled?

Lastly, the Digha Nikaya seems to be particularly reflective of this sort of thing. The other collections are somewhat more literal, or so I've heard. But regarding the suttas as entirely literally true is dubious and trying to reconstruct the past history is probably a waste of time.