Which is Best
Which is Best
Sola scriptura, Tradition or both? Which is best?
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Which is Best
I voted for both scripture and tradition.
I gain a deep understanding by reading scriptures.
But the tradition gives it color.
I gain a deep understanding by reading scriptures.
But the tradition gives it color.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Which is Best
I think I will choose scriptures only.
I got a mixed feeling for tradition.
I got a mixed feeling for tradition.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.
https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Re: Which is Best
I chose "tradition." I'm one of what I imagine will be few who choose "tradition." IMO, without the tradition of the living lineage of the saṃgha, without the training of the past generation of practitioners practicing in accord with the tradition of the vinaya or the bodhisattvaśīla, the Buddhist scriptures would be fairy tales about unrealizable things. Certainly, there might be some theoretical Pratyekabuddhas who arise from reading scriptures in the degenerate age of the Dhamma (when the jewel of the saṃgha has disappeared) but barring that, the saṃgha is vital. There will likely be Buddhist scriptures long after the Dhamma has disappeared completely. There will not be a saṃgha after it has disappeared. My random thoughts on the matter. Unless I'm quite mistaken, I'm sure that in Theravāda as well the Pratyekabuddhas arise irrespective of contact with the previous Buddha's dispensation. So scriptures aren't even necessary for their awakening, nor is tradition.
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.
Re: Which is Best
Agree.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Sat Jan 01, 2022 2:43 am I chose "tradition." I'm one of what I imagine will be few who choose "tradition." IMO, without the tradition of the living lineage of the saṃgha, without the training of the past generation of practitioners practicing in accord with the tradition of the vinaya or the bodhisattvaśīla, the Buddhist scriptures would be fairy tales about unrealizable things. Certainly, there might be some theoretical Pratyekabuddhas who arise from reading scriptures in the degenerate age of the Dhamma (when the jewel of the saṃgha has disappeared) but barring that, the saṃgha is vital. There will likely be Buddhist scriptures long after the Dhamma has disappeared completely. There will not be a saṃgha after it has disappeared. My random thoughts on the matter. Unless I'm quite mistaken, I'm sure that in Theravāda as well the Pratyekabuddhas arise irrespective of contact with the previous Buddha's dispensation. So scriptures aren't even necessary for their awakening, nor is tradition.
Just think that you read the scriptures only and try to imagine a living monk.
We might think that the monks' life is just a fairy tale.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Which is Best
McDhamma with fries please.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Which is Best
The best way is to read from great modern teachers to get a good overview first.
Re: Which is Best
Some of those teachers would have you believe that consciousness is permanent and so Nibbana, or there really is a self etc etc.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: Which is Best
Suttas and sutras
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
- JamesTheGiant
- Posts: 2147
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:41 am
- Location: New Zealand
Re: Which is Best
Actual practise, under the guidance of a master, is the best thing.
Scripture and tradition are easy to understand when you have personal experience of the things described.
Scripture and tradition are easy to understand when you have personal experience of the things described.
- Bhikkhu Pesala
- Posts: 4646
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm
Re: Which is Best
Neither of the above. See Caṅkī Suttaṃ from paragraph 430 onwards.
Caṅkī Sutta wrote:430. “In that way, good Gotama, there is the protection of the truth; in that way there is guarding of the truth; in that way we accept that the truth is protected. How then, good Gotama, is there awakening to the truth? We ask the good Gotama about awakening to the truth.”
Blog • Pāli Fonts • In This Very Life • Buddhist Chronicles • Software (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)