Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by SarathW »

Dhammavamsa wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 10:59 am
SarathW wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 10:27 am
If a particular monk doesn't buy into the Abhidhamma and won't teach it... go to one who will.
Agree.
Before you become a monk know about your teacher and the linage.
However, a person can be ordained with a Theravada teacher thinking that his/her teacher respects Tipitaka.
During my times as a Samanera in a Sri Lankan temple, I remember someone from Sri Lanka said "because of the commentaries, Sri Lanka now don't have Arahants." Personally I think the statement wasn't all true, we can't blame others for our negligence and laziness.

Since you're a Sinhalese, may I know what is the reception of Abhidhamma and canonical commentaries among the common Sri Lankan Buddhists?
The fate of Sri Lankan Buddhists is so sad.
Forget about the Abhidhamma, many Buddhist even do not know the five precepts.
Even among monks, the knowledge of Abhidhamma is nil.
But it is not the issue. The issue is Sri Lankan monks and laypeople embrace Abhidhamma even they don't know about it except some monks like Ven. kiribathgoda Nananda. Lay people in Sri Lanka highly regard the monks with Abhidhamma knowledge.
I remember someone from Sri Lanka said "because of the commentaries, Sri Lanka now don't have Arahants." Personally I think the statement wasn't all true, we can't blame others for our negligence and laziness.
Agree. There are very many uninformed Buddhist in Sri Lanka.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Dhammavamsa
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon May 24, 2021 3:57 pm

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by Dhammavamsa »

SarathW wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:13 am
Dhammavamsa wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 10:59 am
SarathW wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 10:27 am
Agree.
Before you become a monk know about your teacher and the linage.
However, a person can be ordained with a Theravada teacher thinking that his/her teacher respects Tipitaka.
During my times as a Samanera in a Sri Lankan temple, I remember someone from Sri Lanka said "because of the commentaries, Sri Lanka now don't have Arahants." Personally I think the statement wasn't all true, we can't blame others for our negligence and laziness.

Since you're a Sinhalese, may I know what is the reception of Abhidhamma and canonical commentaries among the common Sri Lankan Buddhists?
The fate of Sri Lankan Buddhists is so sad.
Forget about the Abhidhamma, many Buddhist even do not know the five precepts.
Even among monks, the knowledge of Abhidhamma is nil.
But it is not the issue. The issue is Sri Lankan monks and laypeople embrace Abhidhamma even they don't know about it except some monks like Ven. kiribathgoda Nananda. Lay people in Sri Lanka highly regard the monks with Abhidhamma knowledge.
I remember someone from Sri Lanka said "because of the commentaries, Sri Lanka now don't have Arahants." Personally I think the statement wasn't all true, we can't blame others for our negligence and laziness.
Agree. There are very many uninformed Buddhist in Sri Lanka.
Well, I think it is the same to many other countries too. For example, Thai Buddhist city monks many practicing black magics (ไสยศาสตร์ เวทมนตร์), fortune telling, or some blessing ceremony. Myanmar is having political instability and previously one Myanmar Buddhist monk was labelled as Buddhist terrorist. India recent Buddhism is heavily modified to suit their political movement, with all the "Jai Bheem" stuff. Western Buddhism sect was a mix-and-match and almost everyone is having their own Master of interpretation as refuge. Indonesia Theravada was just a minority and not really prosper due to Islamic influence and policy. Malaysia Buddhists are majority temple goer for the sake of worshipping and events.

Well, no complain here. Buddhism will one day be gone too. Nothing lasts.
Deleted
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by SarathW »

Well, no complain here. Buddhism will one day be gone too. Nothing lasts.
I think Buddhism will flourish one day if we have social media like Dhamma Wheel.
There is an upsurge in Social media Dhamma propagation and perhaps do not give up your hope.
People like you can make a difference.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by asahi »

SarathW wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 8:31 am My concern is the authoritative monks are restricting the right to learn and make up your own mind.
Pls go to Myanmar , 99% are abhidhammist . In case you dont know Pa-Auk Sayadaw with his multitude of affiliate network spreads all over south east asia , japan , thailand , indonesia , usa , uk , china , taiwan and germany . Once i heard a monk was saying , sri lanka monks are consist almost all of abhidhammist .
Btw , even monks are having difficulty in learning abhidhamma , how much more difficults for lay peoples to learn ? Surely you have been learning dhamma for decades and abhidhamma also , whats the fuss then ? Are you saying in near future you wont be allowed to study abhidhamma pitaka ? :thinking:
No bashing No gossiping
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by SarathW »

asahi wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:59 am
SarathW wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 8:31 am My concern is the authoritative monks are restricting the right to learn and make up your own mind.
Pls go to Myanmar , 99% are abhidhammist . In case you dont know Pa-Auk Sayadaw with his multitude of affiliate network spreads all over south east asia , japan , thailand , indonesia , usa , uk , china , taiwan and germany . Once i heard a monk was saying , sri lanka monks are consist almost all of abhidhammist .
Btw , even monks are having difficulty in learning abhidhamma , how much more difficults for lay peoples to learn ? Surely you have been learning dhamma for decades and abhidhamma also , whats the fuss then ? Are you saying in near future you wont be allowed to study abhidhamma pitaka ? :thinking:
You still do not get my point.
My problem is monks are going to extremes. It appears there are some countries or places giving too much prominence to Abhidhamma than the Sutta. That is another extreme in my opinion.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by asahi »

SarathW wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 5:10 am Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma a part of the doctrine to be considered as Theravada?
What if a particular Buddhist sect does not accept Abhidhamma as authoritative and reject accepting or teaching it.
You are not asking about Extremity . You are asking if one dont accept Abhidhamma hence they are not of Theravada and about Abhidhamma Authoritativeness .
No bashing No gossiping
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by SarathW »

asahi wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 12:30 pm
SarathW wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 5:10 am Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma a part of the doctrine to be considered as Theravada?
What if a particular Buddhist sect does not accept Abhidhamma as authoritative and reject accepting or teaching it.
You are not asking about Extremity . You are asking if one dont accept Abhidhamma hence they are not of Theravada and about Abhidhamma Authoritativeness .
Sorry, my command of English is not good enough to communicate with you what I think.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
Posts: 2175
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta »

SarathW wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 8:04 am ...
It is not fair to call yourself Theravada and reject Abhidhamma.
...
I would rather say: It is ridiculous to call yourself Theravada and reject Abhidhamma.
𝓑𝓾𝓭𝓭𝓱𝓪 𝓗𝓪𝓭 𝓤𝓷𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓬𝓪𝓵𝓵𝔂 𝓓𝓮𝓬𝓵𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓭 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽
  • Iᴅᴇᴀ ᴏꜰ Sᴏᴜʟ ɪs Oᴜᴛᴄᴏᴍᴇ ᴏꜰ ᴀɴ Uᴛᴛᴇʀʟʏ Fᴏᴏʟɪsʜ Vɪᴇᴡ
    V. Nanananda

𝓐𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓽ā 𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽 𝓣𝓱𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝓘𝓼
  • Nᴏ sᴜᴄʜ ᴛʜɪɴɢ ᴀs ᴀ Sᴇʟғ, Sᴏᴜʟ, Eɢᴏ, Sᴘɪʀɪᴛ, ᴏʀ Āᴛᴍᴀɴ
    V. Buddhādasa
waryoffolly
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by waryoffolly »

mikenz66 wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 8:51 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:45 am ……
The attitude of Vens Sujato, Analayo, and various others seems quite different to the hostile attitude to such works that we sometimes see here, or in works by other teachers.


:heart:
Mike
In agreement with this, here’s a quote I just saw from Ven Analayo that shows a very respectful attitude:
In general terms, it seems to me that conscientious research requires consulting the commentarial tradition. The commentators are considerably closer in time and culture to the early Buddhist period than we are and therefore should not be dismissed out of hand. This also means that the burden of proof, in my view, is with those who wish to propose ideas that are in complete contrast to the exegetical tradition.
In this article: https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg ... theory.pdf
SarathW
Posts: 21227
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by SarathW »

waryoffolly wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:02 am
mikenz66 wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 8:51 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:45 am ……
The attitude of Vens Sujato, Analayo, and various others seems quite different to the hostile attitude to such works that we sometimes see here, or in works by other teachers.


:heart:
Mike
In agreement with this, here’s a quote I just saw from Ven Analayo that shows a very respectful attitude:
In general terms, it seems to me that conscientious research requires consulting the commentarial tradition. The commentators are considerably closer in time and culture to the early Buddhist period than we are and therefore should not be dismissed out of hand. This also means that the burden of proof, in my view, is with those who wish to propose ideas that are in complete contrast to the exegetical tradition.
In this article: https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg ... theory.pdf
:goodpost: Thanks.
This is a great post!
I don't think people who oppose Abhidhamma even have not read it let alone to say why they are opposing except they argue on trivial matters.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by BrokenBones »

SarathW wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:27 am
waryoffolly wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:02 am
mikenz66 wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 8:51 pm
The attitude of Vens Sujato, Analayo, and various others seems quite different to the hostile attitude to such works that we sometimes see here, or in works by other teachers.


:heart:
Mike
In agreement with this, here’s a quote I just saw from Ven Analayo that shows a very respectful attitude:
In general terms, it seems to me that conscientious research requires consulting the commentarial tradition. The commentators are considerably closer in time and culture to the early Buddhist period than we are and therefore should not be dismissed out of hand. This also means that the burden of proof, in my view, is with those who wish to propose ideas that are in complete contrast to the exegetical tradition.
In this article: https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg ... theory.pdf
:goodpost: Thanks.
This is a great post!
I don't think people who oppose Abhidhamma even have not read it let alone to say why they are opposing except they argue on trivial matters.
Can you give an explicit example of Abhidhamma that you have read and that has enhanced your understanding of the Buddha's actual words?
waryoffolly
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by waryoffolly »

BrokenBones wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:30 am Can you give an explicit example of Abhidhamma that you have read and that has enhanced your understanding of the Buddha's actual words?
See for yourself, and decide if this specific example is useful or not: https://www.bps.lk/olib/bp/bp212s_Bodhi ... seship.pdf

You may be quite happy to find that the jhana similes are explained correctly with the body in the similes explicitly 'consisting of skin, flesh and blood' (pg 157, 146 going by page number in the document itself, in the above pdf).
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by BrokenBones »

waryoffolly wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 4:28 am
BrokenBones wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:30 am Can you give an explicit example of Abhidhamma that you have read and that has enhanced your understanding of the Buddha's actual words?
See for yourself, and decide if this specific example is useful or not: https://www.bps.lk/olib/bp/bp212s_Bodhi ... seship.pdf

You may be quite happy to find that the jhana similes are explained correctly with the body in the similes explicitly 'consisting of skin, flesh and blood' (pg 157, 146 going by page number in the document itself, in the above pdf).
I haven't read it (yet)... but it's 200 pages long... I can't remember how many pages the sutta occupies 🤔

Further... it may be good stuff but this isn't actually Abhidhamma, which is what I was referring to.
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by asahi »

if abhidhamna meaning is highest dhamma then suttas as buddhavacana became secondary .
No bashing No gossiping
Dhammavamsa
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon May 24, 2021 3:57 pm

Re: Is it compulsory to accept Abhidhamma as a part of doctrine to be considered as Theravada?

Post by Dhammavamsa »

asahi wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 5:06 am if abhidhamna meaning is highest dhamma then suttas as buddhavacana became secondary .
Abhidhamma is not to be meant as "Highest Dhamma". Dhamma is Dhamma. No difference in the purpose.

Abhidhamma term was coined due to its nature of discussing things in ultimate reality, without the usage of conventional term. That is why the term "Abhi". Abhidhamma Pitaka was compiled and its purpose was to systematise the teachings on psychological aspects. Suttanta will still be authority of the Buddha Sasana.

I don't get why people so misunderstood with the Abhidhamma word. Though I also noticed some only-Abhidhamma lay students in my country were kinda prideful of their learning and forget the practice (which defeating its own purpose). Meanwhile, some rejects Abhidhamma due to its difficulty and claimed Buddha's teachings were simple and should be kept simple (that is just wrong, Buddha Dhamma was never easy, is as if a boat swimming against the big river stream).

I think we should take the middle way, study both and practice within our capabilities and level.
Deleted
Post Reply