============================== A little gentle reminder:
This topic is under Classical Theravada forum & exclusive to those who have still chosen (or inclined to choose) Classical Theravada as (1) the only path, (2) the preferred path, or (3) the favorite path. This topic is not for those who prefers the other paths outside Classical Theravada.
I didn't choose anything. I learnt a way of meditating and living that made a lot of difference to me.. Much later I found out that what I was practicing was part of a lineage and tradition of theravada. It makes not much difference to me except here I get less involved in discussions. I know people from other traditions. I try not to get involved in discussing things with them. If i talk with anyone irl it's with theravada monks. Less need to explain.
It is about the books for me. All the other branches of Buddhism say you can't learn on your own. I haven't found a good teacher where I live and I can't just move. Theravada is the only branch to encourage me to study Dhamma, practice Dhamma, and make progress now. It doesn't depend on fixing my outer life first, saving up money, finding a new job and a new home in a new city, and hoping there will finally be a good teacher there.
Because it seems closest to what the Buddha actually taught, and because in general it seems to be the branch of Buddhism that attaches the least importance to mythology and focuses instead on the cure-disease approach through individual responsibility.
lostitude wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:12 pm
Because it seems closest to what the Buddha actually taught, and because in general it seems to be the branch of Buddhism that attaches the least importance to mythology and focuses instead on the cure-disease approach through individual responsibility.
lostitude wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:12 pm
Because it seems closest to what the Buddha actually taught, and because in general it seems to be the branch of Buddhism that attaches the least importance to mythology and focuses instead on the cure-disease approach through individual responsibility.
I am brand new to Buddhism, but this answer makes perfect sense to me. Thank you for posting.
For me, it's got to be because the canon is the single most internally consistent religious text anywhere I've ever seen and I'm actually able to practice what's described there. it all makes logical sense, and there's more than enough info in the canon to sortof figure where to go. All the other traditions in Buddhism seem to very closely border on wrong view or add unnecessary doctrine to the theravadin teaching or worse, slander arahants.
Please note: This profile picture is not actually a picture of the user.
I don't know what "classical" theravada really is. I guess it would be a doctrinaire approach approved by a state sangha of some kind maybe thai or sri lankan. In other words, it sounds like a label of limited use.
dharmacorps wrote: ↑Mon Feb 15, 2021 11:22 pm
I don't know what "classical" theravada really is. I guess it would be a doctrinaire approach approved by a state sangha of some kind maybe thai or sri lankan. In other words, it sounds like a label of limited use.
Theravadin commentaries, Abhidhamma and other Theravadin texts.
“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.”
dharmacorps wrote: ↑Mon Feb 15, 2021 11:22 pm
I don't know what "classical" theravada really is. I guess it would be a doctrinaire approach approved by a state sangha of some kind maybe thai or sri lankan. In other words, it sounds like a label of limited use.
Theravadin commentaries, Abhidhamma and other Theravadin texts.
That makes sense as a source text that a person practicing "theravada" would refer to, but is this as contrasted with what exactly? Modern theravada like the Forest tradition?
dharmacorps wrote: ↑Mon Feb 15, 2021 11:22 pm
I don't know what "classical" theravada really is. I guess it would be a doctrinaire approach approved by a state sangha of some kind maybe thai or sri lankan. In other words, it sounds like a label of limited use.
Theravadin commentaries, Abhidhamma and other Theravadin texts.
That makes sense as a source text that a person practicing "theravada" would refer to, but is this as contrasted with what exactly? Modern theravada like the Forest tradition?
Possibly, although the Forest Tradition doesn’t always reject those texts.
“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.”