How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Ceisiwr »

thomaslaw wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 10:53 am
Yes, EBT and commentaries are just texts, sectarian, not the words of the Buddha!
I doubt that none of the Buddhas actual words managed to be passed on.
“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
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Ceisiwr »

thomaslaw wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 8:59 am
SarathW wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 8:36 am In my opinion, the Early Buddhist sect went against the spirit of Kalama Sutta.
It is a disservice for the monks who are ordained in this Linage.
They discourage the monks to learn these valuable texts such as Abhidhamma, Commentaries, Visuddhimagga, Patisabidhamagga, etc.
Why can't they allow people to learn every possible thing and let them make up their own minds?
So, the monks should study those texts critically, following the spirit of Kalama Sutta.
The Kalama sutta is for non-Buddhists. Also, if all texts are sectarian and sectarian = bad why then would we listen to the Kalama sutta?
“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
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17191
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by DNS »

SarathW wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 6:46 am
DNS wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 12:49 am I liked Bhante Sujato's essay. Very good, imo. :popcorn:
Perhaps you are correct but what is Early Buddhism and who brought that to Sri Lanka?
I don't think Ven. Sujato defines Early Buddhism properly.
The first 4 Nikayas and most of the KN.

Mahinda and Sanghamitta.

I think he does, he has numerous essays and books defining Early Buddhism and EBT.
SarathW
Posts: 21236
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by SarathW »

DNS wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 4:31 pm
SarathW wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 6:46 am
DNS wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 12:49 am I liked Bhante Sujato's essay. Very good, imo. :popcorn:
Perhaps you are correct but what is Early Buddhism and who brought that to Sri Lanka?
I don't think Ven. Sujato defines Early Buddhism properly.
The first 4 Nikayas and most of the KN.

Mahinda and Sanghamitta.

I think he does, he has numerous essays and books defining Early Buddhism and EBT.
Don't you think it is hypocritical in BS to accept only a part of what Mahinda and Sangamitta brought to Sri Lanka?
What authority has him to do it?
I have no problem with him doing it on a personal level. Is he doing the right thing by stopping others?
Did Mahinda bring only the 4 Nikaya and KN to Sri Lanka?
For instance, if I am powerful enough only to accept say that I accept only Diga Nikaya and reject the rest, is that a responsible Buddhist approach?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
SarathW
Posts: 21236
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by SarathW »

Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 12:55 pm
thomaslaw wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 8:59 am
SarathW wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 8:36 am In my opinion, the Early Buddhist sect went against the spirit of Kalama Sutta.
It is a disservice for the monks who are ordained in this Linage.
They discourage the monks to learn these valuable texts such as Abhidhamma, Commentaries, Visuddhimagga, Patisabidhamagga, etc.
Why can't they allow people to learn every possible thing and let them make up their own minds?
So, the monks should study those texts critically, following the spirit of Kalama Sutta.
The Kalama sutta is for non-Buddhists. Also, if all texts are sectarian and sectarian = bad why then would we listen to the Kalama sutta?
:rofl:
Kalama Sutta is applicable for Buddhists as well. That is applicable for the Buddhists who accept everything in blind faith.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17191
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by DNS »

SarathW wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 10:51 pm Don't you think it is hypocritical in BS to accept only a part of what Mahinda and Sangamitta brought to Sri Lanka?
What authority has him to do it?
I have no problem with him doing it on a personal level. Is he doing the right thing by stopping others?
I don't think he is stopping anyone from having their own views. He is an ordained Buddhist monk and a scholar and is simply presenting his findings. I don't think he forces his findings or views on others.
SarathW
Posts: 21236
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by SarathW »

DNS wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 11:59 pm
SarathW wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 10:51 pm Don't you think it is hypocritical in BS to accept only a part of what Mahinda and Sangamitta brought to Sri Lanka?
What authority has him to do it?
I have no problem with him doing it on a personal level. Is he doing the right thing by stopping others?
I don't think he is stopping anyone from having their own views. He is an ordained Buddhist monk and a scholar and is simply presenting his findings. I don't think he forces his findings or views on others.
I am thinking of his sister temples such as the temple of Ajahn Braham,
Isn't the monk in these temples rejecting Abhidhamma etc?
Is there any chance a person like me to be ordained in these temples? I am sure if I become a monk under Ven, Sujato he will expel me from his temple for not following his rules. As you know he ordered me a lifetime ban from his discussion group.
I do not have any personal anger against him. I still respect him for his great project Sutta Central.
I still do not have any hesitation for support him as a monk.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Coëmgenu »

I don't think Ven Sujāto is the abbot of a monastery. Maybe I'm wrong.

Is Ven Brahmavaṃso an abbot?
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.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Ceisiwr »

SarathW wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 10:54 pm
Ceisiwr wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 12:55 pm
thomaslaw wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 8:59 am

So, the monks should study those texts critically, following the spirit of Kalama Sutta.
The Kalama sutta is for non-Buddhists. Also, if all texts are sectarian and sectarian = bad why then would we listen to the Kalama sutta?
:rofl:
Kalama Sutta is applicable for Buddhists as well. That is applicable for the Buddhists who accept everything in blind faith.
I don't think the Kālāma Sutta is for people who have already taken refuge. The sutta is advice on how to choose a teacher. It's not about how to choose what might be in line with what said teacher taught. A better sutta for that IMO is this
I have heard that at one time the Blessed One was staying at Vesali, in the Peaked Roof Hall in the Great Forest.

Then Mahapajapati Gotami went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, stood to one side. As she was standing there she said to him: “It would be good, lord, if the Blessed One would teach me the Dhamma in brief such that, having heard the Dhamma from the Blessed One, I might dwell alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, & resolute.”

“Gotami, the qualities of which you may know, ‘These qualities lead to passion, not to dispassion; to being fettered, not to being unfettered; to accumulating, not to shedding; to self-aggrandizement, not to modesty; to discontent, not to contentment; to entanglement, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to aroused persistence; to being burdensome, not to being unburdensome’: You may categorically hold, ‘This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher’s instruction.’

“As for the qualities of which you may know, ‘These qualities lead to dispassion, not to passion; to being unfettered, not to being fettered; to shedding, not to accumulating; to modesty, not to self-aggrandizement; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to entanglement; to aroused persistence, not to laziness; to being unburdensome, not to being burdensome’: You may categorically hold, ‘This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher’s instruction.’”

That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Mahapajapati Gotami delighted at his words.
https://suttacentral.net/an8.53/en/thanissaro
“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.”
thomaslaw
Posts: 812
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:55 am
Location: Australia

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by thomaslaw »

DNS wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 4:31 pm
SarathW wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 6:46 am
DNS wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 12:49 am I liked Bhante Sujato's essay. Very good, imo. :popcorn:
Perhaps you are correct but what is Early Buddhism and who brought that to Sri Lanka?
I don't think Ven. Sujato defines Early Buddhism properly.
The first 4 Nikayas and most of the KN.

Mahinda and Sanghamitta.

I think he does, he has numerous essays and books defining Early Buddhism and EBT.
Ven. Sujato in https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/ho ... t/23019/95
refer to “Early Buddhism is the teachings of the “early Buddhist texts” (EBTs), that is, the canonical discourses in Pali, Chinese, Tibetan, and Sanskrit that were codified in the Buddha’s lifetime or shortly thereafter.”

That "shortly thereafter" could refer to the first council, if according to Ven. Yinshun:

The Sutra collections of Early Buddhism include SA/SN (originated at the first council) and MA/MN, DA/DN, and EA/AN (originated at the second council, one hundred years after the death of the Buddha).

SA/SN represents the situation with regard to the compilation of the Buddhist teachings shortly after the death of the Buddha.

MA/MN, DA/DN, and EA/AN represent the Buddhism of the period just before that second council.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Ceisiwr »

thomaslaw wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 4:45 am
That "shortly thereafter" could refer to the first council, if according to Ven. Yinshun:

The Sutra collections of Early Buddhism include SA/SN (originated at the first council) and MA/MN, DA/DN, and EA/AN (originated at the second council, one hundred years after the death of the Buddha).

SA/SN represents the situation with regard to the compilation of the Buddhist teachings shortly after the death of the Buddha.

MA/MN, DA/DN, and EA/AN represent the Buddhism of the period just before that second council.
If true then MA/MN, DA/DN, and EA/AN were complied by 2nd or 3rd generation disciples. That’s still a good point of reference IMO, unless we are to believe that the Dhamma was corrupted by Ananda’s disciples or theirs in turn. If so it doesn’t give much hope to us practicing today IMO. Ven. Ananda could speak and explain the Dhamma as much as the Master could, when he awakened. Personally I think those whom he instructed could do so also, since I believe they too would have been Arahants (his disciples involved at the 2nd council that is). This would mean that MA/MN, DA/DN, and EA/AN are just as good a source of Dhamma as SN/SA are. The same for those whom Ven. Sariputta etc instructed.
“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
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by mikenz66 »

BrokenBones wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:32 am Bhante Sujato doesn't really address that the disembodied jhana is a Vism. Idea and that such an idea is not what is presented in the Suttas. It is a bit of a glaring omission.
He does address that. However, he has a different opinion from yours.
I also do not discuss modern ideas such as “one lifetime dependent origination” or “jhāna-light”, for these are found in neither the EBTs nor the Theravada tradition. It is worth bearing in mind that certain modern forms of Buddhism, with their dismissal of rebirth, Nibbana, and the monastic Sangha, have diverged further from the Buddha’s teachings in a few decades than the traditions did in millennia.
The jhana issue has been addressed in many places, here and elsewhere, and Ven Dhammanando has given a helpful set of links to discussions on the Sutta Central forum: viewtopic.php?p=560317#p560317

Related to this is the discussion of how the term nimitta evolved:
nimitta: the basis for meditation

The Visuddhimagga describes in detail the development of the so-called nimitta in meditation. The nimitta is a perception, typically seen as a light, that arises and stabilizes as the meditator becomes free of hindrances. This terminology has become entrenched in modern meditation discourse.

The EBTs, however, never use the word nimitta in this way. Nimitta is rather a curious term that straddles the range of a “sign, hint, indication” that something is to come, and the “cause” of that thing. The nimitta of the sunrise is the brightening of the night sky, just as the nimitta of the eightfold path is right view.

In meditation, nimitta refers to a certain quality or aspect of experience which, when attended to, promotes the growth of similar or related qualities. Thus paying attention to the “sign of beauty” (subhanimitta) gives rise to lust, while the “basis of samādhi” (samādhinimitta) is the four kinds of mindfulness meditation, i.e. the practices that lead to samādhi.

This has led some interpreters to overshoot the mark, alleging that the commentaries did not just change the term, but that they invented the very idea of the light seen in meditation. While the commentarial account obviously adds a lot of detail to the Suttas—which is, after all, the point of a commentary—we find in the EBTs that “lights” and “forms” are an normal aspect of the samādhi experience. Clearly these terms, which occur in many ways in many contexts, refer to the same kind of experience that modern Theravadins call nimitta.
:heart:
Mike
BrokenBones
Posts: 1784
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by BrokenBones »

mikenz66 wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 8:37 pm
BrokenBones wrote: Thu Jan 13, 2022 11:32 am Bhante Sujato doesn't really address that the disembodied jhana is a Vism. Idea and that such an idea is not what is presented in the Suttas. It is a bit of a glaring omission.
He does address that. However, he has a different opinion from yours.
I also do not discuss modern ideas such as “one lifetime dependent origination” or “jhāna-light”, for these are found in neither the EBTs nor the Theravada tradition. It is worth bearing in mind that certain modern forms of Buddhism, with their dismissal of rebirth, Nibbana, and the monastic Sangha, have diverged further from the Buddha’s teachings in a few decades than the traditions did in millennia.
The jhana issue has been addressed in many places, here and elsewhere, and Ven Dhammanando has given a helpful set of links to discussions on the Sutta Central forum: viewtopic.php?p=560317#p560317

Related to this is the discussion of how the term nimitta evolved:
nimitta: the basis for meditation

The Visuddhimagga describes in detail the development of the so-called nimitta in meditation. The nimitta is a perception, typically seen as a light, that arises and stabilizes as the meditator becomes free of hindrances. This terminology has become entrenched in modern meditation discourse.

The EBTs, however, never use the word nimitta in this way. Nimitta is rather a curious term that straddles the range of a “sign, hint, indication” that something is to come, and the “cause” of that thing. The nimitta of the sunrise is the brightening of the night sky, just as the nimitta of the eightfold path is right view.

In meditation, nimitta refers to a certain quality or aspect of experience which, when attended to, promotes the growth of similar or related qualities. Thus paying attention to the “sign of beauty” (subhanimitta) gives rise to lust, while the “basis of samādhi” (samādhinimitta) is the four kinds of mindfulness meditation, i.e. the practices that lead to samādhi.

This has led some interpreters to overshoot the mark, alleging that the commentaries did not just change the term, but that they invented the very idea of the light seen in meditation. While the commentarial account obviously adds a lot of detail to the Suttas—which is, after all, the point of a commentary—we find in the EBTs that “lights” and “forms” are an normal aspect of the samādhi experience. Clearly these terms, which occur in many ways in many contexts, refer to the same kind of experience that modern Theravadins call nimitta.
:heart:
Mike
Yeah... like I said... he didn't address them. Waving the Jhana lite description as some sort of derisive slogan, addresses nothing. It's understandable a comparison between sutta & Vism. was not part of the article... the EBTs descriptions are just too hard to fudge.

As for light... nobody denies that light appears... just don't make it the focus, cling to it and definitely don't merge with it... if people did that they'd likely lose their senses.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Ceisiwr »

BrokenBones wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 10:40 pm
As for light... nobody denies that light appears... just don't make it the focus, cling to it and definitely don't merge with it... if people did that they'd likely lose their senses.
:tongue:
Attachments
samadhi.jpg
light poltergiest.jpg
light poltergiest.jpg (40.07 KiB) Viewed 454 times
“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
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: How Early Buddhism differs from Theravada: a checklist by Bhante Sujato

Post by Sam Vara »

BrokenBones wrote: Sat Jan 15, 2022 10:40 pm As for light... nobody denies that light appears... just don't make it the focus, cling to it and definitely don't merge with it... if people did that they'd likely lose their senses.
I reckon I'm doing one and a half out of three. My meditation teacher tells me to focus on the nimitta, and drop all other perceptions except the light and a background awareness of breathing.

Will I lose my senses, or just some of them? And is that a good or a bad thing?
Post Reply