viewtopic.php?f=13&t=40455&p=626963&hilit=poll#p626963"And no, a poll cannot be added at this stage, but feel free to recreate this topic (potentially worded differently based on this conversation to date?) with a poll and we'll close this one off with a link to the new one."
Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
This post hadn't being acted on so I have made this poll.
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
I voted 8 and 10
It would have been good if the list had numbers.
It would have been good if the list had numbers.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
-
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon May 24, 2021 3:57 pm
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
I voted 8, 9, and 10.
Though I know the fact that only Sutta and Vinaya were compiled systematically and orally by the Arahants at that time. Imo, The Arahants know the Abhidhamma but it was not put into oral text systematically.
Though I know the fact that only Sutta and Vinaya were compiled systematically and orally by the Arahants at that time. Imo, The Arahants know the Abhidhamma but it was not put into oral text systematically.
Deleted
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
I voted for the opposite.
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
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
-
- Posts: 10157
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
Having spent some time with the Abhidhamma, I regard it as a commentary on the suttas. Interesting, but not essential, and not a replacement for the suttas.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
Greetings,
I've got no problem with the presence of Abhidhamma within Theravada, other than for any Abhidhamma evangelists who try to ex-communicate those who don't subscribe to Abhidhamma or the commentaries.
Metta,
Paul.
I've got no problem with the presence of Abhidhamma within Theravada, other than for any Abhidhamma evangelists who try to ex-communicate those who don't subscribe to Abhidhamma or the commentaries.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
This is great but what about the people who are intolerant to free inquiry and free-thinking?retrofuturist wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 11:09 am Greetings,
I've got no problem with the presence of Abhidhamma within Theravada, other than for any Abhidhamma evangelists who try to ex-communicate those who don't subscribe to Abhidhamma or the commentaries.
Metta,
Paul.
The people who think this is the only truth everything is false?
Last edited by SarathW on Mon Jun 14, 2021 11:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
I voted #8 because i see little value in equating Theravada with what the Buddha taught. Theravada is a Buddhist sect or school, and for all practicle purposes, Abhidhamma been acknowledged by Theravadin institutions. However, all Buddhists seem to agree that the Buddha taught the dhamma. The term "Abhidhamma" seems to have the addition "Abhi". To me, its best to stick to the basics without any additions.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
Greetings,
Metta,
Paul.
They try to ex-communicate or cancel those who are.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
- Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
- Posts: 2175
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
Me too. I would only vote these three even if I could select more than three options.
For 9, at least a part of Abhidhamma, imo.
For 8 ... I'm not satisfied with the sentence. It is not merely an important part of Theravada. It is a fundamental & indispensable part of Theravada similar to the other two pitakas. If there is no Theravada Abhidhamma, there would be no such thing as Theravada, simple as that.
As I said somewhere, it would no longer be funny and weird as well as it would be very logical, rational & auspicious, if the Abhidhamma blemishers try to attack the abhidhamma only after their abandonment of Theravada first.
One wants to refute abhidhamma? No problem. Please do it. However, please do it only after one's departure from Theravada, so that one doesn't look too silly and awkward, and one doesn't look similar to a proverbial dog that sleeps on a leather, and eats the very leather on which it sleeps. Thanks.
𝓑𝓾𝓭𝓭𝓱𝓪 𝓗𝓪𝓭 𝓤𝓷𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓬𝓪𝓵𝓵𝔂 𝓓𝓮𝓬𝓵𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓭 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽
𝓐𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓽ā 𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽 𝓣𝓱𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝓘𝓼
- 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
-
- Posts: 10157
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
Like the Mahayana, Theravada is a collection of schools and teachers which has continuously developed over 2000 years. It's not a monolithic entity, and it's not like a club where you have to agree to certain rules. It's not like Therevada has a ruling body who will excommunicate naughty members.Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 1:43 pmMe too. I would only vote these three even if I could select more than three options.
For 9, at least a part of Abhidhamma, imo.
For 8 ... I'm not satisfied with the sentence. It is not merely an important part of Theravada. It is a fundamental & indispensable part of Theravada similar to the other two pitakas. If there is no Theravada Abhidhamma, there would be no such thing as Theravada, simple as that.
As I said somewhere, it would no longer be funny and weird as well as it would be very logical, rational & auspicious, if the Abhidhamma blemishers try to attack the abhidhamma only after their abandonment of Theravada first.
One wants to refute abhidhamma? No problem. Please do it. However, please do it only after one's departure from Theravada, so that one doesn't look too silly and awkward, and one doesn't look similar to a proverbial dog that sleeps on a leather, and eats the very leather on which it sleeps. Thanks.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
I said "yes" to 2, 8, and 10.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
- Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta
- Posts: 2175
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:06 pm
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
How about Ajahn Chah's Thai Forest Tradition vs Ajahn Brahm ?Spiny Norman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 1:51 pmLike the Mahayana, Theravada is a collection of schools and teachers which has continuously developed over 2000 years. It's not a monolithic entity, and it's not like a club where you have to agree to certain rules. It's not like Therevada has a ruling body who will excommunicate naughty members.Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 1:43 pmMe too. I would only vote these three even if I could select more than three options.
For 9, at least a part of Abhidhamma, imo.
For 8 ... I'm not satisfied with the sentence. It is not merely an important part of Theravada. It is a fundamental & indispensable part of Theravada similar to the other two pitakas. If there is no Theravada Abhidhamma, there would be no such thing as Theravada, simple as that.
As I said somewhere, it would no longer be funny and weird as well as it would be very logical, rational & auspicious, if the Abhidhamma blemishers try to attack the abhidhamma only after their abandonment of Theravada first.
One wants to refute abhidhamma? No problem. Please do it. However, please do it only after one's departure from Theravada, so that one doesn't look too silly and awkward, and one doesn't look similar to a proverbial dog that sleeps on a leather, and eats the very leather on which it sleeps. Thanks.
And, theravada without theravada abhidhamma would not be a development. It would be a degeneration; a meaningless defunct lable to be coveted only by the projecting-distorting-Theravada-identifiers and Schismatic Trojans :
- Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta wrote: ↑Sun Nov 29, 2020 3:21 pm According to "progressive Theravada" or more commonly, "Modern Theravada" or "Early Buddhism"
https://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?ti ... _Theravada
Those who reject Abhidhamma Pitaka itself (regardless of commentaries) are not actual Theravadins (nor Vibhajjavadins), according to this:
- ... if we look at the earliest definitions of Buddhism, we see that Early Buddhism without the Commentaries was called Theravada:
Without getting into a discussion of all the various early schools, If we look at a quick timeline of what Buddhism was called, early Buddhism before the Commentaries was called Theravada:
* The time of the Buddha: "Buddhism" is called Dhamma-Vinaya
* First Council: Dhamma-Vinaya (483 BCE)
* Second Council: Dhamma-Vinaya (350 BCE)
* Third Council: Vibhajjavada ("doctrine of analysis") and shortly thereafter: Theravada (250 BCE)
* Fourth Council: Theravada (100 BCE)
The Abhidhamma became a part of the Canon at the Third Council.
The Commentaries were written from 300 CE to 13 century CE, after the Fourth Council.
Thus, someone who follows the "Theravada" as it was set to be from the First to Third Councils, would be a "Theravadin" although today they might be known as "Modern Theravada."
Early Buddhism without rejecting Abhidhamma Pitaka may belong to Theravada, of course.
...
𝓑𝓾𝓭𝓭𝓱𝓪 𝓗𝓪𝓭 𝓤𝓷𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓬𝓪𝓵𝓵𝔂 𝓓𝓮𝓬𝓵𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓭 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽
𝓐𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓽ā 𝓜𝓮𝓪𝓷𝓼 𝓣𝓱𝓪𝓽 𝓣𝓱𝓮𝓻𝓮 𝓘𝓼
- 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
Apart from direct personal experience, I only know the various opinions I happen to have read about. I've never read the A...a and doubt I will. At the time of The Buddha many people heard a discourse, perhaps two, directly, or heard The Dhamma from someone else and many attained streamentry by practicing the way they were instructed to.
Today many people read many, many, discourses and spend a lot of time opinionating and few attain streamentry.
If streamentry or enlightenment was dependent on having read large parts of the suttas and A..a then there would be no shortage of noble ones.
At the same time, calling oneself a True Believer with or without the commentaries does not magically confer on one some special assurance of future attainment and, whatever ones position is, if the practice is correct one can be assured.
Illiterates who practice correctly and know one or two suttas are better positioned than scholars who know all the suttas and or commentaries but never practice correctly.
If the commentaries work for you, great. Good for you. If they don't, that's fine too. Meanwhile I certainly would take the word of past guardians of The Dhamma seriously.
I choose 0
Today many people read many, many, discourses and spend a lot of time opinionating and few attain streamentry.
If streamentry or enlightenment was dependent on having read large parts of the suttas and A..a then there would be no shortage of noble ones.
At the same time, calling oneself a True Believer with or without the commentaries does not magically confer on one some special assurance of future attainment and, whatever ones position is, if the practice is correct one can be assured.
Illiterates who practice correctly and know one or two suttas are better positioned than scholars who know all the suttas and or commentaries but never practice correctly.
If the commentaries work for you, great. Good for you. If they don't, that's fine too. Meanwhile I certainly would take the word of past guardians of The Dhamma seriously.
I choose 0
-
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon May 24, 2021 3:57 pm
Re: Poll: Abhidhamma and Theravada.
I got a feeling that people simply reject Abhidhamma or any commentaries due to its sheer high amount of technical terms and scholarly method of explanation. They don't even try to read them and there proclaim they understand the Suttas, not knowing that they might potentially distort the meaning of Suttas.Sabbe_Dhamma_Anatta wrote: ↑Mon Jun 14, 2021 1:43 pmMe too. I would only vote these three even if I could select more than three options.
For 9, at least a part of Abhidhamma, imo.
For 8 ... I'm not satisfied with the sentence. It is not merely an important part of Theravada. It is a fundamental & indispensable part of Theravada similar to the other two pitakas. If there is no Theravada Abhidhamma, there would be no such thing as Theravada, simple as that.
As I said somewhere, it would no longer be funny and weird as well as it would be very logical, rational & auspicious, if the Abhidhamma blemishers try to attack the abhidhamma only after their abandonment of Theravada first.
One wants to refute abhidhamma? No problem. Please do it. However, please do it only after one's departure from Theravada, so that one doesn't look too silly and awkward, and one doesn't look similar to a proverbial dog that sleeps on a leather, and eats the very leather on which it sleeps. Thanks.
One great example is from Ajahn Brahm's statement that he said in one of its famous YouTube talks, "keep the teachings simple, just 4 Noble Truths, you know...." But Buddha never said His teachings were simple and easy for this generation of mankind, in fact Buddha commented that His Dhamma are not easy to be realised and He did incline not to teach at first point (but then Sutta said that Brahma Sahampati, the Overlord in Brahma Gods World, comes and plead the Buddha to teach the Dhamma).
Just finished the first chapter of Abhidhamattha Sangaha, and it gives me a clearer picture on how beings are hurled from one existence to another and sometimes land in happy existence and sometimes in woeful states according to Paticca Samuppada. And it can only be ended by achieving Arahantship.
Deleted