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

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 11110
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

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

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 1:57 am Buddha very clearly said that Buddhism will be diminished due to internal forces, not external forces.
Abhidhamma is papanca therefore unattractive. In other words, relatively few Buddhists read Abhidhamma.

But the Visuddhimagga is dangerous because of its flowerily teachings about sila & metta than appeals to those who are not so smart. After developing much sīlabbata-parāmāsa from loving these sila & metta ramblings in the Visuddhimagga, these impressionable people take the rest of the Visuddhimagga as authoritative.

The utter historical degeneration of Buddhism is Sri Lankan appears due to the Visuddhimagga. Where as countries such as Burma and Thailand always innovated different teachings.
Last edited by DooDoot on Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:12 am, edited 3 times in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 24477
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

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

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
DooDoot wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:05 am The utter historical degeneration of Buddhism is Sri Lankan appears due to the Visuddhimagga. Where as countries such as Burma and Thailand always innovated different teachings.
Sri Lanka "innovated different teachings" too - specifically those from ven. Nanananda and immigant ven. Nanavira, both of whom expressed a Dhamma very opposed to the Visudhimagga world view. Because they attempted a return to the Suttas, they were both reviled by Sri Lankan Buddhists as heretics.

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

"Why now do you assume 'a being'? Mara, have you grasped a view?" (SN 5.10)

"Overcome the liar by truth." (Dhp 223)
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 12757
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

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

Post by Ceisiwr »

I have to laugh at the idea that the Burmese don’t follow the Visuddhimagga.
“The mental and material are really here,
But here there is no human being to be found,
For it is void and merely fashioned like a doll—
Just suffering piled up like grass and sticks.”


Visuddhimagga
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 11110
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

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

Post by DooDoot »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:19 am they were both reviled by Sri Lankan Buddhists as heretics.
yes, unlike Bhikkhu Buddhadasa in Thailand, who, while initially opposed, also won over the establishment

Bhikkhu Buddhadasa represented Thailand at the 6th Buddhism Council

did any Malaysians go to the 6th Buddhism Council? :shrug:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 11110
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

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

Post by DooDoot »

Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:20 am I have to laugh at the idea that the Burmese don’t follow the Visuddhimagga.
they do follow it. but they also have an independence is creating their own meditation teachings, etc
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 12757
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

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

Post by Ceisiwr »

DooDoot wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:24 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:20 am I have to laugh at the idea that the Burmese don’t follow the Visuddhimagga.
they do follow it. but they also have an independence is creating their own meditation teachings, etc
Kind of contradicts what you just said then :roll:
“The mental and material are really here,
But here there is no human being to be found,
For it is void and merely fashioned like a doll—
Just suffering piled up like grass and sticks.”


Visuddhimagga
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 11110
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

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

Post by DooDoot »

Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:31 am Kind of contradicts what you just said then :roll:
not at all

:focus:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 12757
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

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

Post by Ceisiwr »

DooDoot wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:32 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:31 am Kind of contradicts what you just said then :roll:
not at all

:focus:
Very much so. You just contradicted yourself. But yes, let’s move on from this dire spectacle.

:focus:
Last edited by retrofuturist on Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: 2a violation removed
“The mental and material are really here,
But here there is no human being to be found,
For it is void and merely fashioned like a doll—
Just suffering piled up like grass and sticks.”


Visuddhimagga
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 11110
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

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

Post by DooDoot »

Ceisiwr wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:35 am You just contradicted yourself.
Not at all. Retrofuturist understood what i posted. Some Buddhist cultures are unable to depart at all from the papanca Vsm.

:focus:
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
Pondera
Posts: 1979
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 10:02 pm

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

Post by Pondera »

I don’t reject the Abhidamma. However, I don’t see how the following is necessarily useful and/or why I should reference it such that I become better acquainted with the Buddha’s actual words.
Ceisiwr wrote: Wed Jun 09, 2021 11:08 am
1.1.1. The “skilful” triad
Phenomena that are skilful.
Phenomena that are unskilful.
Phenomena that are undesignated.

1.1.2. The “feelings” triad
Phenomena associated with pleasant feelings.
Phenomena associated with painful feelings.
Phenomena associated with neutral feelings.

1.1.3. The “result” triad
Phenomena that are results.
Phenomena that are liable to be affected by results.
Phenomena that are neither results nor liable to be affected by results.

1.1.4. The “what has been grasped” triad
Phenomena that have been grasped and are liable to be affected by grasping.
Phenomena that have not been grasped but are liable to be affected by grasping.
Phenomena that have neither been grasped nor are liable to be affected by grasping.

1.1.5. The “defiled” triad
Phenomena that are defiled and are liable to be affected by defilement.
Phenomena that are not defiled but are liable to be affected by defilement.
Phenomena that are neither defiled nor are liable to be affected by defilement.

1.1.6. The “initial application of mind” triad
Phenomena that are with initial and sustained application.
Phenomena that are without initial and with only sustained application.
Phenomena that are with neither initial nor sustained application.

1.1.7. The “rapture” triad
Phenomena that are imbued with rapture.
Phenomena that are imbued with pleasure.
Phenomena that are imbued with equanimity.

1.1.8. Triad to be abandoned by seeing
Phenomena to be abandoned by seeing.
Phenomena to be abandoned by developing.
Phenomena to be abandoned neither by seeing nor by developing.
https://suttacentral.net/ds1.1/en/sujato

This is the first chapter of the Dhammasaṅgaṇī. It’s hardly verbose. So far it’s much the same as what we find in DN 33 & DN 34.
This is a very long list. I would like to ask Ceisiwr if he has put this list to memory? Also, what advantage do I have by “knowing” this list? And to what suttas am I better equipped to talk about having read this list? And why?

Also, an earlier quote by Ceisiwr revealed that those who know the Abhidamma are “the true dhamma preachers” (to paraphrase).

I find statements like these akin to the Bible where John says that all verses of the Bible are breathed in by God. Which is an appeal to Authority fallacy.

I find the same statement akin to the Mahayana dogma that state (because of their lofty goals) the original teachings of the Buddha must be reinterpreted - or that (in fact) the Mahayanist has already reinterpreted the early dhamma and anyone who preaches Hinayana is inferior and heretical.

But the Abhidamma insist their view is superior. Am I to believe a list like the one you’ve provided is the basis for their claims to “superior understanding”?

Whatever the case, I’ve started reading the Abhidamma and all I find are these lists. And moreover, the translator has found them so excessively cumbersome that the majority of these lists read:

“As in 46a with ‘skillful’ instead of ‘unskillful’”

And I think Ceisiwr knows what I mean. This kind of “refer to the earlier passage which is exactly the same except that one word is different “.

We already find enough of that kind of repetition in the suttas.

The examples of repetition in the Abhidamma approach absurdity and I disagree the idea that you have anything to gain from memorizing such lists. Nor is it readily apparent that they serve any purpose.

They certainly don’t convey much of a message. They’re just “lists”. :shrug:
“Monk, the property of light, the property of beauty, the property of the dimension of the infinitude of space, the property of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, the property of the dimension of nothingness: These properties are to be reached as perception attainments.[2] The property of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception is to be reached as a remnant-of-fabrications attainment. The property of the cessation of feeling & perception is to be reached as a cessation attainment."[3]

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 24477
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

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

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Pondera wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:11 am They certainly don’t convey much of a message. They’re just “lists”. :shrug:
Aka "the valley of dried bones".

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

"Why now do you assume 'a being'? Mara, have you grasped a view?" (SN 5.10)

"Overcome the liar by truth." (Dhp 223)
SarathW
Posts: 16169
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 »

I don’t reject the Abhidamma. However, I don’t see how the following is necessarily useful and/or why I should reference it such that I become better acquainted with the Buddha’s actual words.
It is OK.
Even I do not understand the whole Abhidhamma. This is my point all those monks and their followers who reject Abhidhamma do not have any idea about it. Their motto is ' I don't know so I reject it" Instead of saying "I don't understand" Because they have such a high ego and they don't want to admit it.
You and I have some chance of understanding Abhidhamma one day but those who reject will never learn it.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 11110
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

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

Post by DooDoot »

SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:21 amThis is my point all those monks and their followers who reject Abhidhamma do not have any idea about it.
But i have some idea about it. Much of what i read in Abhidhamma i reject; such as its view on the Four Noble Truths and Dependent Origination.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 24477
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

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

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
SarathW wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 4:21 am This is my point all those monks and their followers who reject Abhidhamma do not have any idea about it. Their motto is ' I don't know so I reject it" Instead of saying "I don't understand" Because they have such a high ego and they don't want to admit it.
This sounds like a perverse straw man to me.

For anyone I know who is interested in the Suttas, but not interested in the Abhidhamma, it is because they believe the Buddha taught the Suttas, but did not teach the Abhidhamma.

To me, the Abhidhamma is as sectarian and divorced from the Buddha's teachings as the Mahayana Sutras are.

Thus, nothing to do with ego or understanding... it is about accurately discerning Buddhavacana from non-Buddhavacana.

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

"Why now do you assume 'a being'? Mara, have you grasped a view?" (SN 5.10)

"Overcome the liar by truth." (Dhp 223)
SarathW
Posts: 16169
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 »

[Thus, nothing to do with ego or understanding... it is about accurately discerning Buddhavacana from non-Buddhavacana./quote]
I don't believe that Sutta's are Buddhavacana.
They also compiled like someone the same way they compiled the Abhidhamma.
But in a different format.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Post Reply