Agenda of the four Nikayas

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17169
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Agenda of the four Nikayas

Post by DNS »

Dan74 wrote: So when David (and others) say "Why waste time with material that is probably not Buddhavacana and are most likely later additions" there is a huge assumption being made that only what is recorded in the Pali suttas is conducive to awakening.
I was just mentioning the points of the two main type of views in Theravada today and I can understand how one could take either view, not really taking sides in that post.

But now that you mention that, in retro's post, the quote from the Buddha states to look to the Nikayas and Vinaya "only" in pretty specific terms:
"In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it.
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Agenda of the four Nikayas

Post by Dan74 »

Yes, David, when I reread it I saw you were listing approaches. Sorry for misrepresenting!

And of course I know the quote and have no issue with it. At the time of saying this, both Discourses and Discipline must've been well-remembered by the monks, otherwise this may also be a later addition to solidify the Suttanta position and close the Dhamma, so to speak. :shrug:
_/|\_
Brizzy

Re: Agenda of the four Nikayas

Post by Brizzy »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Brizzy,
Brizzy wrote:The four Nikayas stand out as the words of the Buddha, all of the above is not very important but it highlights the huge disparity between what the Buddha actually SAID and what has become accepted as his teaching.

I have highlighted in previous postings my doubts about momentary concentration/path & fruit having to happen immediately and numerous other teachings that somehow do not make it into the four Nikayas, which brings me to my question..............................Why do people accept teachings that were not the Buddha's words/teachings and in many cases do not have the "flavour" of the suttadhamma?
I suspect the answer is deference to sectarian tradition (regardless of which tradition - Theravada or another). There is an inherent conflict within modern Theravada - you've got those who are Theravadin by default because Theravada is the only tradition that lays any emphasis on what the Buddha actually taught (the four nikayas plus the earlier aspects of the fifth + the Vinaya)... whereas others are Theravadin because they specifically choose the Theravada tradition and all that comes with that (which is evidently more than just the four nikayas plus the earlier aspects of the fifth + the Vinaya). When there is conflict between those additions and what the Buddha taught, there is inherent conflict. As it stands presently, that cannot be avoided.

Getting worked up about it though, only causes suffering... the suttas themselves make this clear. It is better to act in accord with the suttas than it is to speak them and act in defiance of them.

All that can be done in discussion with those who defer to tradition (again, whichever tradition that may be) is to present one's argument, without anger, without frustration, without snarkiness, and allow them to decide what is correct, in accordance with their own reasoning, understanding and experience. Explain your reasoning - how you got from point A to point B (as indeed you have done well in the original post of this topic), and raise the investigative questions that have gotten you to your position. If criticism of a particular doctrinal argument is necessarily entailed in that, then try to keep it as specifically targeted and articulated as possible... avoiding broad-brush statements that will simply get others' back up. Some may take up the challenge you're putting on the table - others won't... but that decision is essentially theirs to make.

Metta,
Retro. :)
Hi Retro

I appreciate your kind posting. I dont actually get worked up about disparities, I find I can divorce my personal practice from my online "alter ego" :rolleye: . I think because my "style & humour" are not very smooth - I can come across as "antagonistic".

At the same time I am passionate about the validity of the Buddha's sutta/vinaya and feel that disparities should be investigated and not ignored. The above sutta about the Venerable Mahamoggallaana was an eye-opener to me. I had read it previously without giving thought to its implications and this I feel is the fundamental point. The Buddha advised us that no teachings should be accepted without referring them to the sutta/vinaya and to do this we must not give up our right/obligation to question later/modern teachings. I hope like you said that people will take up the challenge on the table - this is a great way to investigate.

:smile:
Post Reply