Why did you choose Theravada?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Post Reply
Cafael Dust
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by Cafael Dust »

But I know a spade when I see one. And, all modesty aside, I know something about writing.
Now some texts I do understand only too well, but not on their own terms. Some texts use various devices known to advertisers, other religions, propaganda machines etc etc. They employ loaded questions, poisonings of the well and other ad-hominem logical fallacies to attack their opponents - confusing since often their opponents have vanished into history, leaving us with unbalanced writing. They employ tautologies, what I will call 'appeals to grandiosity of imagery', Emperor's New Clothes arguments (only wise/brave/high quality people can understand this...), chain letter type threats e.g. 'spread this sutra and you will be enlightened very soon, disparage it and you will die!'... (...idiots. I hate chain letters), and, oddly for Buddhism, homunculus arguments, to support their own poorly defined ideas, or actually, usually not their ideas but their desire to increase support for their sectarian missions.
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.
User avatar
jcsuperstar
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
Location: alaska
Contact:

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by jcsuperstar »

are we still talking about the lotus sutra? i read somewhere that Sanskrit scholars think very little of it as a text and whomever wrote it must not have been very proficient in the language. but my own personal opinion was it just dragged on and on and never fully delivered. my zen master once asked me what i thought of it, and i said it only seems to teach that it is the best sutra ever but never really goes anywhere as far as really teaching anything. he agreed. i was so much more fond of sutra like the heart and diamond.
สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ

the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by pink_trike »

jcsuperstar wrote:are we still talking about the lotus sutra? i read somewhere that Sanskrit scholars think very little of it as a text and whomever wrote it must not have been very proficient in the language. but my own personal opinion was it just dragged on and on and never fully delivered. my zen master once asked me what i thought of it, and i said it only seems to teach that it is the best sutra ever but never really goes anywhere as far as really teaching anything. he agreed. i was so much more fond of sutra like the heart and diamond.
Sanskrit scholars also think very little of the "The Buddha" as an actual person.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

pink_trike wrote:
I was just pointing out that without a very thorough understanding of how the Sutra was constructed, the specific use of metaphor and allegory, and more importantly, the cultural milieu within which it was constructed, it would be impossible to even consider the possibility of the grand conclusions you put forth.
Back up your claim.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Mawkish1983
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by Mawkish1983 »

pink_trike wrote:Sanskrit scholars also think very little of the "The Buddha" as an actual person.
Do they? :( Well I think he's awesome... so there.
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by pink_trike »

Mawkish1983 wrote:
pink_trike wrote:Sanskrit scholars also think very little of the "The Buddha" as an actual person.
Do they? :( Well I think he's awesome... so there.
Perhaps I should have underlined "actual" - meaning a flesh and blood person who lived and died. Increasingly, scholars are unable to find any solid evidence of it...evidence that should be available if he actually lived and wasn't just a conceptual devise.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

pink_trike wrote: Increasingly, scholars are unable to find any solid evidence of it...evidence that should be available if he actually lived and wasn't just a conceptual devise.
Back up your claim.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Mawkish1983
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by Mawkish1983 »

tiltbillings wrote:
pink_trike wrote: Increasingly, scholars are unable to find any solid evidence of it...evidence that should be available if he actually lived and wasn't just a conceptual devise.
Back up your claim.
I'm keen to see this too :) my understanding was that the styles of the teachings in the Pali Canon were sufficiently similar to suggest a common teacher... but I may be wrong and no immediate source comes to mind. Anyway, does 'no evidence' = 'no existance'? I wonder how much evidence of your existence will be around in 2500 years time. Would "I woz ere, signed Buddha" etched into the Bodhi tree be sufficient?

Sorry, I'm being facetious. :)
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by pink_trike »

tiltbillings wrote:
pink_trike wrote: Increasingly, scholars are unable to find any solid evidence of it...evidence that should be available if he actually lived and wasn't just a conceptual devise.
Back up your claim.
Too busy right now, and its irrelevant to me whether he lived or not. If it matters to you, do the research (outside of institutional Buddhism).
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by pink_trike »

Mawkish1983 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
pink_trike wrote: Increasingly, scholars are unable to find any solid evidence of it...evidence that should be available if he actually lived and wasn't just a conceptual devise.
Back up your claim.
I'm keen to see this too :) my understanding was that the styles of the teachings in the Pali Canon were sufficiently similar to suggest a common teacher... but I may be wrong and no immediate source comes to mind. Anyway, does 'no evidence' = 'no existance'? I wonder how much evidence of your existence will be around in 2500 years time. Would "I woz ere, signed Buddha" etched into the Bodhi tree be sufficient?

Sorry, I'm being facetious. :)
There are detailed, cross-referenced verification from different countries for very many people who lived during periods much earlier than the time the Buddha is generally believed by Buddhists to have lived. There is a notable absence/shortage of this kind of verification for "The Buddha"...verification that should be quite abundant given the number of words attributed to him.
Last edited by pink_trike on Sat Dec 26, 2009 2:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by Cittasanto »

easy cop out, if it really didn't matter to you you wouldn't say it!
Back up your claim, or don't claim!!
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Mawkish1983
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by Mawkish1983 »

I wonder if the caustic atmosphere I am perceiving here is my own mental construction... I hope it is. I don't like a bad atmosphere, particularly in a forum such as this.

:group:
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by pink_trike »

Mawkish1983 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
pink_trike wrote: Increasingly, scholars are unable to find any solid evidence of it...evidence that should be available if he actually lived and wasn't just a conceptual devise.
Back up your claim.
I'm keen to see this too :) my understanding was that the styles of the teachings in the Pali Canon were sufficiently similar to suggest a common teacher...
They are sufficiently similar to suggest a common style of oral tradition...but this reflects nothing about the origin of the content.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by pink_trike »

Manapa wrote: if it really didn't matter to you you wouldn't say it!
Wrong. :smile:

I could care less if there was ever an actual living "The Buddha". I'm interested in the practices and testing the teachings. Nothing more.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Why did you choose Theravada?

Post by Cittasanto »

pink_trike wrote:
Manapa wrote: if it really didn't matter to you you wouldn't say it!
Wrong. :smile:

I could care less if there was ever an actual living "The Buddha". I'm interested in the practices and testing the teachings. Nothing more.
so your making claims that the buddha didn't exist based on what practice?
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Post Reply