On Tradition

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: On Tradition

Post by Ceisiwr »

retrofuturist wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:46 pm Greetings,
Ontheway wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:38 pm This is why Lord Buddha often explained things in brief, then move to details, and further to full exposition.
Yes, but that is irrelevant, because that's not what's being argued against.

What I am arguing against is the presumption that the Buddha's teaching is inadequate and that it necessarily needs to be fleshed out by someone who happens to finds it incomplete.

Metta,
Paul. :)
That’s a straw man. No one is arguing that.
“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.”
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: On Tradition

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:47 pm That’s a straw man. No one is arguing that.
Except, it's not a straw man when it's my argument, Ceisiwr.

That is what "Buddhist traditions" are... people being unwilling to merely stick to the duty of the four great references ascribed in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, who instead take it upon themselves to elaborate, extrapolate, expand, interpret, infer, reify, proliferate, tabulate, scholasticize, reinterpret, build "higher dharmas", and ultimately quarrel and bicker with other sects about the superiority of their own doctrines.

Pointless.

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."
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: On Tradition

Post by Ceisiwr »

retrofuturist wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:52 pm Greetings,
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:47 pm That’s a straw man. No one is arguing that.
Except, it's not a straw man when it's my argument, Ceisiwr.

That is what "Buddhist traditions" are... people being unwilling to merely stick to the duty of the four great references ascribed in the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, and to take it upon themselves to elaborate, extrapolate, expand, interpret, reify, proliferate, reinterpret, and ultimately quarrel and bicker with other sects about the superiority of their own doctrines.

Pointless.

Metta,
Paul. :)
Saying the suttas don’t contain everything isn’t the same as saying the Buddha’s teachings are incomplete. This is a strange kind of sutta fetishism to think so. I’ve never argued that the Buddha’s teachings are incomplete, so it is a straw man.
“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.”
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: On Tradition

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:55 pm Saying the suttas don’t contain everything isn’t the same as saying the Buddha’s teachings are incomplete.
So, we're agreed that sectarian concepts and interpretations are superfluous then?

If so, good. It is good to be able to cease conversation as there is nothing left to say "on tradition".

Good day sir.

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."
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22391
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: On Tradition

Post by Ceisiwr »

retrofuturist wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:58 pm Greetings,
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:55 pm Saying the suttas don’t contain everything isn’t the same as saying the Buddha’s teachings are incomplete.
So, we're agreed that sectarian concepts and interpretations are superfluous then?

If so, good. It is good to be able to cease conversation as there is nothing left to say "on tradition".

Good day sir.

Metta,
Paul. :)
The point being that the Buddha’s teachings were complete, but suttas and sutras were never meant to capture every detail regarding what he taught and so this is where the Sangha comes in. So, traditions are important especially when they agree.
“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.”
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: On Tradition

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:20 pm The point being that the Buddha’s teachings were complete, but suttas and sutras were never meant to capture every detail regarding what he taught and so this is where the Sangha comes in. So, traditions are important especially when they agree.
Here we go. You're back to insisting as an article of faith (or faithlessness, perhaps), that there's more "details" required, and no doubt you have an army of sectarians willing to "fill in those details" with unbounded proliferation.

We nearly wrapped it up nicely. Alas, people don't take their duty seriously.

The following sutta extract is for the benefit of anyone who does...
DN 16 wrote:The Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Now, bhikkhus, I shall make known to you the four great references. Listen and pay heed to my words." And those bhikkhus answered, saying:

"So be it, Lord."

Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief. Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.'

"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. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve."
Taken seriously, the preservation of the four great references would have prevented the rise of differentiable traditions.

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."
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: On Tradition

Post by SDC »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 3:39 pm
There is. There are signs that will take the thinking in the direction of wholesome, and signs that will take the thinking in the direction of unwholesome. If a person wants to restrain and not act when they are assailed with thoughts related to sensuality, they will look for signs of danger instead of gratification. Literally if we are getting hammered by that prospect for a lustful act, we have the option to either reflect on its danger and restrain or try to act in a manner that gets rid of it, which is usually engagement, which usually ends in gratification.
The suttas talk of "in the seen, only the seen" when it comes to sense restraint. How does that work, and what exactly is a sign according to the suttas? Any definition of it there?
That famous utterance is in one suttas about sense restraint, and part of an instruction to dying monk. There are another thousand suttas about restraint without it. Signs are described in SN 47.8 (the cook). The cook learns the preferences of his king by how he treats the dishes. The bhikkhu is instructed to see the preferences of his own mind, a mind that has preferences that the monk may want to develop away from, and despite the direction his mind is beckoning, he keeps the setup of proper mindfulness and only does what is in the direction of wholesome. (See Thag 19.1 for a mind with its own agenda).
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 3:39 pm
The kasinas correspond with the broadest aspect of perception, which is color, and also with elements. I'm not super familiar with kasinas, but looks to be notions of the complete extent of things. For earth, described as solidity, is about gathering the extent of solidity in the whole experience and bringing that in line with the earth element in the body. I think you'll find most of this MN 62. I don't have the time to find it now.
This does not tell us just what exactly Kasiṇa practice consists of, nor how they fit into the path as a whole. You reference MN 62 and give us a theory based on that, but this proves my point. The suttas do not state it, so you have to make and educated guess.
Kasina practice is just one way to develop dispassion. It is necessary to go at insight from every available direction. If it doesn't resonate at all, don't waste your time with it.
Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 3:39 pm
The point being that based on the suttas alone, regarding the the eight bases of overcoming no one really has a clue what they mean yet the Buddha considered them to be important. No doubt his audience would have known what they were and how the practice works, and if they didn't no doubt he would have explained it, but none of that is in the suttas. We do find it however in the commentaries, which is where you would expect to find it. If we want to know how a meditation practice actually works suttas give the outline whilst commentaries give the details based on the experiences of masters who practiced them, who in turn learnt it from their masters and so on stretching back to the time of the Buddha. I think that is a safer source on how to practice meditation, or how to find out other details regarding what the suttas say, than modern guesswork and general fumbling around. Of course, not all commentarial sources both southern and northern agree on everything but there is a broad consensus on quite a lot of issues nonetheless.
I agree there is a lot missing in the suttas, but there is also a lot in the suttas that most people do not want to do, which would open up alot space that they have filled with gratification. They don't want to test out the eight precepts. They don't want to stop satisfying themselves with good food. Stop getting sexual gratification. They don't want to get away from entertainment. The want Dhamma while they stay in sensuality. What we do know about the context of ancient India is that there weren't endless ways to treat the body like a carnival the way we do in the modern world, and that is why Dhamma was much closer. We are soaked in sensuality, don't want to do the work to dry ourselves out, and then get frustrated that we aren't becoming the noble GIANTS we read about in the suttas. That is the part that is missing in my opinion. For the record, this is directed at everyone, even me.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: On Tradition

Post by SDC »

mikenz66 wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 6:43 am
SDC wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 1:10 am My point there was that those in positions of influence tend not to prioritize freedom from suffering.
I think you'd have to provide some actual examples. Do you mean that some teachers sometimes comment on how to live a good life or about social issues? The Buddha did that... so... :thinking:
The Buddha did that in cases of those who had no desire to practice towards the goal, though it was super rare that he would do so without at least prioritizing virtue. This topic, as I understood from the OP, is about the response from the community when pressed for clarification about the suttas from those who want to practice towards the goal. I'm positing that when pressed, the majority of the community fails to prioritize freedom from suffering for the individual.

That has been my experience. Maybe I'm too focused subtext and intention, which is where the impression usually comes from. I tend to think you are far more trusting, which is not necessarily a bad thing. I'm not though. I find that a majority of the Buddhist community is jaded and bitter and I feel bad for those who get gathered up in the community's baggage.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: On Tradition

Post by Pulsar »

SDC wrote
"I agree there is a lot missing in the suttas"
Can you name a few pl?
Regards :candle:
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: On Tradition

Post by Pulsar »

Ceisiwr wrote
What is the sutta definition of a sign and where does it explain not grasping signs and features?
Definition of signs and features are found in Sutta on Dependent Origination. Explanations on grasping signs and features are found in Salayatana Samyutta.
You wrote
the eight bases of overcoming no one really has a clue
perhaps no one has a clue since that has been rejected, just as much as DN 22 and MN 10 have been rejected.
In which suttas do you find the phrase "8 bases of overcoming?"
Regards :candle:
Last edited by Pulsar on Mon Jan 17, 2022 1:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: On Tradition

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Pulsar wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:44 am SDC wrote
"I agree there is a lot missing in the suttas"
Can you name a few pl?
Regards :candle:
I don't remember seeing any advice on boiling eggs, and that's a big failing of the Suttas. Surely there's many factors to take into account such as the size of the egg, the initial temperature of the egg, the colouring of the egg, the type of bird that the egg came from, how runny the yolk should be, and how long to cook the egg if you're making Scotch eggs. And as for the precise yellow of the egg yolk... surely there's a hundred similes missing from the Suttas which could have laboriously compared the yolk to an entire assortment of flowers, grains, seeds, scented timbers, birds, clays, cosmetics, body parts, and broken household utensils.

I demand answers to my irrelevant questions! :lol:
MN 63 wrote:“Why have I left that undeclared? Because it is unbeneficial, it does not belong to the fundamentals of the holy life, it does not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna. That is why I have left it undeclared.

“And what have I declared? ‘This is suffering’—I have declared. ‘This is the origin of suffering’—I have declared. ‘This is the cessation of suffering’—I have declared. ‘This is the way leading to the cessation of suffering’—I have declared.

“Why have I declared that? Because it is beneficial, it belongs to the fundamentals of the holy life, it leads to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbāna. That is why I have declared it.

“Therefore, Mālunkyāputta, remember what I have left undeclared as undeclared, and remember what I have declared as declared.”
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."
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9062
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: On Tradition

Post by SDC »

Pulsar wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 12:44 am SDC wrote
"I agree there is a lot missing in the suttas"
Can you name a few pl?
Regards :candle:
My comments were in regards to context. I have no suspicions about the suttas being incomplete when it comes to right view guidance.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Jack19990101
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am

Re: On Tradition

Post by Jack19990101 »

what if practice is more like learning to ride bicycle or swim, less like assembly a Ikea furniture. Maybe all we need is to keep at it and exhausts our wits, then it clicks.

Words are crude and we are talking about all those subtle movements of an invisible mentality. As if we use a stick pointing to an virus.

It doesn't matter there is commentary or not, because if we accept commentary is necessary to sutta, then soon we will have to answer to the demand of commentary to the commentary.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: On Tradition

Post by mikenz66 »

SDC wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:40 pm The Buddha did that in cases of those who had no desire to practice towards the goal, though it was super rare that he would do so without at least prioritizing virtue. This topic, as I understood from the OP, is about the response from the community when pressed for clarification about the suttas from those who want to practice towards the goal. I'm positing that when pressed, the majority of the community fails to prioritize freedom from suffering for the individual.

That has been my experience. Maybe I'm too focused subtext and intention, which is where the impression usually comes from. I tend to think you are far more trusting, which is not necessarily a bad thing. I'm not though. I find that a majority of the Buddhist community is jaded and bitter and I feel bad for those who get gathered up in the community's baggage.
It's not simply that I'm trusting, it's that people I've interacted with or listened to carefully have sometimes come up with amazingly helpful suggestions about how to proceed. At other times they might talk about social issues, which is a good thing - the Buddha himself spoke in favour of a well-functioning, fair society. Without some social stability Dhamma practice is not actually sustainable. Besides, as you've often pointed out, without sorting out one's worldly issues, further progress is unlikely.

I guess what I particularly object to in this thread (especially in Paul's posts) is the idea that there are a handful of insightful truth tellers, and the rest are are a complete waste of time. In my experience, that's complete nonsense. What I would say though, is that for a particular person at a particular time, being nudged in a particular direction can be particularly helpful. But that is very individual and context-sensitive. Just because I'm not particularly inspired by some teachers doesn't mean they are worthless.

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: On Tradition

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 10:43 am I guess what I particularly object to in this thread (especially in Paul's posts) is the idea that there are a handful of insightful truth tellers, and the rest are are a complete waste of time.
Oh, that's interesting. I don't recall saying anything of the sort. Last time I checked, I was arguing in favour of the sufficiency of the Sutta Pitaka.

Please point me to the origin of this papanca.

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."
Post Reply