Samaya

A forum for beginners and members of other Buddhist traditions to ask questions about Theravāda (The Way of the Elders). Responses require moderator approval before they are visible.
davcuts
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:03 am
Location: Asheville, North Carolina

Samaya

Postby davcuts » Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:20 pm

This might be a totally naive question, but I have never studied Theravada Buddhism, so please bare with me. Is there samaya in Theravada Buddhism? In Tibetan Buddhism it's a big no no to speak negatively against your teacher. I've been taught it can lead to aeons in hell. Is it the same for Theravada?

Thanks,
David

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 17855
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Samaya

Postby retrofuturist » Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:39 pm

"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Samaya

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:54 pm



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.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Samaya

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:57 pm

Hi All
I think the Kalama Sutta is also relevant as the Buddha says that even he should be questioned.


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.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 17855
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Samaya

Postby retrofuturist » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:00 pm

Greetings Manapa,

There doesn't seem to be anything along the lines of what davcut's is enquiring about...

Introduction to the Patimokkha Rules
Thanissaro Bhikkhu
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... intro.html

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
Fede
Posts: 1182
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:33 pm
Location: The Heart of this "Green & Pleasant Land"...
Contact:

Re: Samaya

Postby Fede » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:04 pm

I found :

and

Hope it helps.....
"Samsara: The human condition's heartbreaking inability to sustain contentment." Elizabeth Gilbert, 'Eat, Pray, Love'.

Simplify: 17 into 1 WILL go: Mindfulness!

Quieta movere magna merces videbatur. (Sallust, c.86-c.35 BC)
Translation: Just to stir things up seemed a good reward in itself. ;)

I am sooooo happy - How on earth could I be otherwise?! :D


http://www.armchairadvice.co.uk/relationships/forum/

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Samaya

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:08 pm



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.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 17855
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Samaya

Postby retrofuturist » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:14 pm

"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 14947
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Samaya

Postby mikenz66 » Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:30 am

Greetings davcuts,

We don't have the guru relationship that I believe samaya refers to. And it's not clear whether you're talking about "disagreeing" or "being insulting". Obviously you can question a teacher without indulging in harmful speech, and I don't think we should mix that up with harmful speech.

In Theravada Monks have certain rules regarding their preceptor, but that's not relevant to a lay student. However, my monastic teachers certainly caution me that speaking badly about anyone should be avoided due to kammic consequences. Which is a no-brainer, since such speech would usually violate the fourth precept ("The monks at that monastery are don't study/meditate/work hard enough..." etc.).

Metta
Mike

davcuts
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:03 am
Location: Asheville, North Carolina

Re: Samaya

Postby davcuts » Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:42 am

Thanks everyone!

I have made remarks about my teacher that people have condemned me to hell for saying. Mainly I've stated he has hurt a lot of people with his actions. Is saying such a thing in Theravada Buddhism justification for someone to spend aeons in hell?

I can understand how criticizing someone who has reached realizations is not a wise thing to do. I don't however understand why speaking the truth no matter what it might be can send someone to hell for aeons. It seems fear is used in Tibetan Buddhism to make sure people obey their teachers at all cost. Even if that teacher is abusing you, speaking out is considered breaking samaya. Is it the same with Theravada Buddhism?

Breaking samaya according to Tibetan Buddhism is the worst action someone can do. They don't just go to hell, they go to the worst possible hell, imprisoned in molten lava for aeons. So how is this viewed in Theravada Buddhism. Can someone say they believe their teacher has harmed a great many of people without the fear of hell?

Take care,
David

User avatar
jcsuperstar
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
Location: alaska
Contact:

Re: Samaya

Postby jcsuperstar » Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:18 am

i think thats a mainly tantric thing, guru devotion. the closest thing to that would be the master/student relationship in zen and even there its way more fluid than in tibetan buddhism, my master and i argued a lot, i looked to him as a sort of father, once i told him im glad it wasnt the old days and he couldnt hit me with a stick, he said back, if it was the old days he would have beaten me to death by now :jumping:
dogen once said how ever you shouldnt critise a group of monks as when theres monks in a group it represents the sangha (as a whole i guess)

but bad conduct kinda should be pointed out in individuals, i think a lay person is suposed to (one of our monk friends can correct me here theyd know better) advise a monk to not do bad things or something, but maybe that is just in regards to creating a schism.. i cant remember. but mainly if a monk is bad i think they way he's traditionaly dealt with is to just not offer him food, and the other monks will kinda run him off since it will end up meaning theyll starve too if the lay people quit suporting the temple
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
cooran
Posts: 8502
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Samaya

Postby cooran » Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:20 am

Hello davcuts,

The Vinaya Rules for the Ordained are not the same as Vajrayana Samaya being practised by lay devotees of a particular teacher. Nor is it the same as the taking Precepts.

The Buddha never required Samaya from any follower. My understanding is that this first began with tantric practitioners hundreds of years after the Buddha entered Parinibbana - in Tibet about the 7th Century of the modern era and most widely known via Sakya Pandita's lists of vows or commitments.

And 'realised' practitioners were never encouraged by the Buddha to make their attainments public. One has to wonder just how it could be proven or disproven. Enlightened beings do not do anything that could be criticised by sincere followers of the Dhamma - they do not breach the Precepts, and don't have a particular understanding that allows them to act in immoral, selfish, harmful or criminal ways. i.e. Saying one is enlightened doesn't make it so.

metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Samaya

Postby Cittasanto » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:30 am

Last edited by Cittasanto on Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:48 am, edited 1 time in total.


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.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 17855
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Samaya

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:33 am

"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
Dhammanando
Posts: 3521
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:44 pm
Location: Huai Bong, Lamphun

Re: Samaya

Postby Dhammanando » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:59 am


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Samaya

Postby Cittasanto » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:39 am

Hi Bhante,
Yes that is what I was meaning, . one of my favourite suttas, although can never remember the name? and possibly where I used harsh from.


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.

davcuts
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:03 am
Location: Asheville, North Carolina

Re: Samaya

Postby davcuts » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:28 pm

I wish no ill will towards my teacher. I however feel the need to educate people about the tradition he created. There where times I spoke out of anger, and that seems to be the cause for people accusing me of going straight to hell when I die. It doesn't seem this type of fundamentalist beliefs are held in Theravada Buddhism. So could a Theravada practitioner state they feel there former teacher was a cult leader, or would that be breaking some precept?

Thanks,
David

User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: Samaya

Postby Ngawang Drolma. » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:31 pm

I don't like it when people scare others with hell talk. And then go so far as to condemn them to aeons in hell.

No one knows your karma or future births, Dave. Not even you :heart:


User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 17855
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Samaya

Postby retrofuturist » Tue Jan 27, 2009 10:03 pm

"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" - Thomas Paine

User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: Samaya

Postby Ngawang Drolma. » Thu Jan 29, 2009 12:50 am

PS

What would be worse than breaking samaya would be following a guru who is heading directly to the hell realms.

Theravadan people please ignore above comment. Is only about TB samaya and David's pain and worry.

Kindly,
Drolma :heart:



Return to “Discovering Theravāda”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine