Theravãda development

A forum for beginners and members of other Buddhist traditions to ask questions about Theravāda (The Way of the Elders). Responses require moderator approval before they are visible in order to double-check alignment to Theravāda orthodoxy.
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by samseva »

User1249x wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 6:50 am As i understand it;

All schools Mahayana, Vajrayana, Sarvastivada and Theravada approve of the earliest texts but there is disagreement on later texts and commentary.
I don't think Mahāyāna approve of the earliest Buddhist texts. If some are, it's mostly just lip-service, since the earliest texts directly contradict the Mahāyāna sutras (or at the very least, they say they approve them, because they've completely re-interpreted them based on Mahāyāna teachings).
User1249x wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 6:50 am Theravadins have a lot of commentary ideas, there are thousands of pages of commentary interpretations and these are of varying quality and often unknown origin.
I wouldn't say a lot. Many Thervādins, and even whole sects don't give credibility/importance to the commentaries.
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by samseva »

DooDoot wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:11 am
User1249x wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 6:50 amThere are some learned people who practice correctly, are learned, they analyze rightly but i think they tend to keep quiet , dwell in remote places and generally keeping to themselves.
If these few "keep quiet" and "keep it to themselves", how can you know they even exist or what they believe? :roll:
I don't think it is just "these few." More like the majority. A forum and especially the Internet, or even most temples, are definitely not representative of all practitioners—and the well-learned scholars and good practitioners probably almost all avoid such mediums, and keep to themselves to study/practice diligently.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by Pulsar »

Samseva wrote
"and the well-learned scholars and good practitioners probably almost all avoid such mediums, and keep to themselves to study/practice diligently"
Excuse me, that would go against Buddha's teaching, I cannot pick one sutta as evidence, you would have to
do a google search, although some may have a reason not to participate, when you think of zillion mile long threads that try to to convince others
that 'Nirvana comes into existence' (Not exact title)
within those trapped by the 5 aggregates. Those who do not understand the teaching replace the teaching with commentaries. Only fools tread in where wise men fear to go.
One can never know the mind of another, even if they stood in front of them. Can they?
I have found [name redacted by admin] to be not such a fool, (based not on one comment, but multiple comments). It pleases me that s/he is here, there, and everywhere. His sensibility is remarkable, many a time. Everyone makes
an error of judgement now and then.

Withlove :candle:
User1249x
Posts: 2749
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by User1249x »

samseva wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 1:02 pm
User1249x wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 6:50 am As i understand it;

All schools Mahayana, Vajrayana, Sarvastivada and Theravada approve of the earliest texts but there is disagreement on later texts and commentary.
I don't think Mahāyāna approve of the earliest Buddhist texts. If some are, it's mostly just lip-service, since the earliest texts directly contradict the Mahāyāna sutras (or at the very least, they say they approve them, because they've completely re-interpreted them based on Mahāyāna teachings).
User1249x wrote: Mon Aug 17, 2020 6:50 am Theravadins have a lot of commentary ideas, there are thousands of pages of commentary interpretations and these are of varying quality and often unknown origin.
I wouldn't say a lot. Many Thervādins, and even whole sects don't give credibility/importance to the commentaries.
I don't know much about mahayana and appreciate the correction. As to Theravadin commentary i think it is overwhelming for me;
- Progression to 16 insight knowledges
- Progression from Yamaka to Abhidhammatha Sangaha's momentariness
- Progression to systematization of meditation methods as in the Vsm
- Mischellaneous interpretations of path and fruit attainments

It's too much for me. I will probably never bother to spend any more time on learning about the ideas of 16 knowledges, those expressed in the Abhidhammasangaha and their development.

I've read the entire Vsm and now 5 years later i think it is a big nothing burger with very little practically useful information but that is my opinion.

I think you are correct in that it is probably relatively little commentary compared to other schools but that too i can only assume.
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by samseva »

User1249x wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:19 pm I don't know much about mahayana and appreciate the correction. As to Theravadin commentary i think it is overwhelming for me;
[...]

It's too much for me. I will probably never bother to spend any more time on learning about the ideas of 16 knowledges, those expressed in the Abhidhammasangaha and their development.

I've read the entire Vsm and now 5 years later i think it is a big nothing burger with very little practically useful information but that is my opinion.
There are parts of those works that aren't of practical value—at least in the beginning. However, some are highly valuable. I've found the instructions of mettā-bhāvana in the Visuddhimagga to be incredibly useful and precise, for example. The division of citta/cetasika/rūpa/Nibbāna of the Abhidhamma, and the descriptions of the different cetasika, I've found to be highly practical, particularly for Satipaṭṭhāna.

You choose useful parts of these works and apply them to your practice. Little-by-little, you start having a better understanding of the whole work—but only after understanding and applying at least some aspects of the work to your own practice.
User1249x
Posts: 2749
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by User1249x »

Pulsar wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:09 pm Samseva wrote
"and the well-learned scholars and good practitioners probably almost all avoid such mediums, and keep to themselves to study/practice diligently"
Excuse me, that would go against Buddha's teaching, I cannot pick one sutta as evidence, you would have to
do a google search, although some may have a reason not to participate, when you think of zillion mile long threads that try to to convince others
that 'Nirvana comes into existence' (Not exact title)
within those trapped by the 5 aggregates. Those who do not understand the teaching replace the teaching with commentaries. Only fools tread in where wise men fear to go.
One can never know the mind of another, even if they stood in front of them. Can they?
There is this text in an2.39
at a time when bad mendicants are strong, good-hearted mendicants are weak. Then the good-hearted mendicants continually adhere to silence in the midst of the Saṅgha, or they stay in the borderlands. This is for the hurt and unhappiness of the people, for the harm, hurt, and suffering of many people, of gods and humans.
I think it is a bit difficult to estimate who is 'winning' atm but it is in dependence on that text that i assume that there must be some good people who are silent. I can speculate all day as to why they wouldn't be more vocal but i guess the main reason must be not wanting to be harrassed.
User1249x
Posts: 2749
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by User1249x »

samseva wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:36 pm
User1249x wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:19 pm I don't know much about mahayana and appreciate the correction. As to Theravadin commentary i think it is overwhelming for me;
[...]

It's too much for me. I will probably never bother to spend any more time on learning about the ideas of 16 knowledges, those expressed in the Abhidhammasangaha and their development.

I've read the entire Vsm and now 5 years later i think it is a big nothing burger with very little practically useful information but that is my opinion.
There are parts of those works that aren't of practical value—at least in the beginning. However, some are highly valuable. I've found the instructions of mettā-bhāvana in the Visuddhimagga to be incredibly useful and precise, for example. The division of citta/cetasika/rūpa/Nibbāna of the Abhidhamma, and the descriptions of the different cetasika, I've found to be highly practical, particularly for Satipaṭṭhāna.

You choose useful parts of these works and apply them to your practice. Little-by-little, you start having a better understanding of the whole work—but only after understanding and applying at least some aspects of the work to your own practice.
Just for the record, i didn't mean to say that all commentary is useless. There are some which are of critical importance but a lot of it isn't, that is my general take on it. Some of it, like the metta system, i have no means of verifying because i don't train like that so it is good that people try things out and share results.
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by samseva »

User1249x wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:45 pm Just for the record, i didn't mean to say that all commentary is useless. There are some which are of critical importance but a lot of it isn't, that is my general take on it. Some of it, like the metta system, i have no means of verifying because i don't train like that so it is good that people try things out and share results.
Didn't take it that way at all. I'm not too fond of intentionally studying the commentaries as well. They're highly valuable to clarify complicated Pāḷi terms, and also difficult to translate passages, but not as stand-alone study material. At least, that's how I see it.
User avatar
samseva
Posts: 3045
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 12:59 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by samseva »

Pulsar wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:09 pm
samseva wrote:and the well-learned scholars and good practitioners probably almost all avoid such mediums, and keep to themselves to study/practice diligently
Excuse me, that would go against Buddha's teaching, I cannot pick one sutta as evidence, you would have to
do a google search, although some may have a reason not to participate, when you think of zillion mile long threads that try to to convince others
that 'Nirvana comes into existence' (Not exact title)
within those trapped by the 5 aggregates. Those who do not understand the teaching replace the teaching with commentaries. Only fools tread in where wise men fear to go.
One can never know the mind of another, even if they stood in front of them. Can they?
I have found [name redacted by admin] to be not such a fool, (based not on one comment, but multiple comments). It pleases me that s/he is here, there, and everywhere. His sensibility is remarkable, many a time. Everyone makes
an error of judgement now and then.

Withlove :candle:
I'm not following you. I'm just saying learned scholars and advanced practitioners aren't on forums and the Internet.
User1249x
Posts: 2749
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by User1249x »

samseva wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:52 pm
User1249x wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:45 pm
Didn't take it that way at all. I'm not too fond of intentionally studying the commentaries as well. They're highly valuable to clarify complicated Pāḷi terms, and also difficult to translate passages, but not as stand-alone study material. At least, that's how I see it.
That's similar to how i see it as well. My experience in learning the Dhamma is that i got sucked into many of the traditional cliches that people are presented with due to everyone initially being trained according to some tradition and public discourse is influenced by it, so we all learn the same cookie-cutter expressions and fall victims to popularizations. It takes a lot to overcome this and i think learning & remembering the Sutta is most important.

Initially i was tempted to study everything of commentary and become super-learned but i think life is too short, commentary is hardly exhaustible (if one starts looking at other schools) and in the end one will be peerless in that knowledge anyway because the general population is just not into all that. It is therefore quite useless as i see it and it is most important to analyze and memorize the early texts.
simsapa
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat May 23, 2020 5:51 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by simsapa »

Based on the suttas it seems Arahants can still keep certain character flaws despite having no defilements.
Sources?
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22383
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Theravãda development

Post by Ceisiwr »

simsapa
Sources?
At times the Buddha could appear quite grumpy:
Then the Buddha said to Venerable Ānanda, “Ānanda, who’s making that dreadful racket? You’d think it was fishermen hauling in a catch!”

And Ānanda told him what had happened.

“Well then, Ānanda, in my name tell those mendicants that the teacher summons them.”

“Yes, sir,” Ānanda replied. He went to those mendicants and said, “Venerables, the teacher summons you.”

“Yes, reverend,” replied those mendicants. Then they rose from their seats and went to the Buddha, bowed, and sat down to one side. The Buddha said to them:

“Mendicants, what’s with that dreadful racket? You’d think it was fishermen hauling in a catch!”

And they told him what had happened.

“Go away, mendicants, I dismiss you. You are not to stay in my presence.”

“Yes, sir,” replied those mendicants. They got up from their seats, bowed, and respectfully circled the Buddha, keeping him on their right. They set their lodgings in order and left, taking their bowls and robes.
https://suttacentral.net/mn67/en/sujato
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Rājagaha at the Bamboo Grove, the Squirrels' refuge. Now at on that occasion Ven. Pilindavaccha went around addressing the monks as if they were outcastes.

So a large number of monks went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, bowed down to him and sat to one side. As they were sitting there they said to him, "Lord, Ven. Pilindavaccha goes around addressing the monks as if they were outcastes."

Then the Blessed One told a certain monk, "Come, monk. In my name, call Pilindavaccha, saying, 'The Teacher calls you, friend Vaccha.'"

Responding, "As you say, lord," to the Blessed One, the monk went to Ven. Pilindavaccha and on arrival said to him, "The Teacher calls you, friend Vaccha."

Responding, "As you say, my friend," to the monk, Ven. Pilindavaccha went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, "Is it true, Pilindavaccha, that you go around addressing the monks as if they were outcastes?"

"Yes, lord."

Then the Blessed One, having directed attention to Ven. Pilindavaccha's previous lives, said to the monks, "Don't take offense at the monk Vaccha. It's not out of inner hatred that he goes around addressing the monks as if they were outcastes. For 500 consecutive lifetimes the monk Vaccha has been born in brahman families. For a long time he has been accustomed to addressing people as outcastes. That's why he goes around addressing the monks as if they were outcastes."

Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:


In whom there's no deceit
or conceit,
his greed ended,
unpossessive, free from longing,
his anger dispelled,
his mind unbound:[1]
He's a contemplative.
He is a brahman
: a monk.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Here an Arahant is still keeping certain character traits that others find rude. Then, of course, we have the rivalry between Ven. Ananda and Ven. Mahākassapa as shown in suttas like the Bhikkhunūupassaya Sutta. So, Arahants keep some remnant of their older personality even if that personality can be stern or rude. It seems Arahants can sometimes even clash with each other. My personal opinion is that members of the sangha couldn't match their idealised view of an Arahant with the actions of Arahants and so went on to develop a theory of the fallibility of Arahants.
Last edited by Ceisiwr on Wed Aug 19, 2020 6:43 pm, edited 4 times in total.
“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: Theravãda development

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

The Sidebar conversation on Nagarjuna and Arahantship conversation has been moved.

:focus:

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."
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Theravãda development

Post by Ontheway »

Ceisiwr wrote: Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:56 pm Chieu Khai Thanh
I am totally new to Buddhism. I would like to ask you all for a help. I am not sure that all Buddhist Councils were held to protect or persist the original scripture of the Buddha and at which one, we can see it was well established. Apparently, there were many opposite schools or parties attended but should we say that all results inclined toward Theravāda?
The 2nd Buddhist council resulted in a split in the Sangha. This lead to the establishing of the Sthavira and Mahāsāṃghika sects. Mahāsāṃghika went on to split into various sub-schools as did Sthavira. Regarding the 3rd Buddhist council my history on this is not great and I am sure that other more knowledgeable members will correct me but, as far as I'm aware, the council was either attended only by Theravāda monastics or it occurred before the split between Sarvāstivāda and Vibhajyavāda, with Sarvāstivāda breaking away after the council. The Sautrāntika then split from Sarvāstivāda after the 3rd Council as they rejected their Abhidharma and other doctrines, whilst the Vibhajyavādins split into Dharmaguptaka, Theravāda and others with, I believe, the Pudgalavādins having gone their own way prior to the 3rd council. There is of course a lot more detail to all of this as well as other views on when the splits occurred and from who. The important thing, however, is understanding what these different schools were arguing about and so which one preserved, or at least was closest to, what the Buddha taught. I would advise you to look into what these different schools taught so you can reach your own conclusions. For wikipedia, this is quite a good overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Buddhist_schools

My own summary would be:

Mahāsāṃghika = "Great Sangha" A more transcendental and supernatural Buddha. Likely the origin of Mahāyāna thought. Arahants are not perfect.

Sarvāstivāda = "All Exists School". The tradition taught that dhammas exist in the 3 periods of time. The past, present and future all exist. Arahants are not perfect.

Dharmaguptaka = "Guardians of the Dhamma". Closer to Theravāda, although they went on to adopt the Mahāyāna (as did it seems the Sarvāstivādins). Arahants are not perfect.

Pudgalavādins = "Personalist Teaching". In this tradition it is taught that all aggregates are not-self but a real "person" exists.

Sautrāntika = "Sutra only school". Rejection of the Sarvāstivāda Abhidharma. Prefer to rely on the sutras (although they did make their own Abhidharma texts in the end). Nibbāna = nothingness.

That is, of course, a very very simple summary. The Points of Controversy (Kathavatthu) is a Theravāda Abhidhamma text which outlines the doctrines of the other schools and argues against them. It originates from the 3rd Buddhist council, where Theravāda orthodoxy was established. You can find it online or buy it from the Pali Text Society (or possibly from another supplier).
:goodpost:
A very simple yet concise summary.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Post Reply