the pali texts are incoherent?

[robertk]

in over thirty years of Dhamma study, I can't think of single discrepancy between the ancient Commentaries, Abhidhamma and suttas.

Well, I just gave an example of discrepancy earlier in this thread. And for example, if you read B. Bodhi's translation notes you will find he often has a critical approach to the Commentaries, which can sometimes give narrow interpretations or even wrong ones, so he doesn't always follow them. This is one of the facts showing, in my opinion, that the idea according to which there may be discrepancies isn't so foolish that it can be discarded without bothering to address objections.

The four factored or five factored jhana is explained very coherently in the texts. Simply because some people reject the explanations doesn't make them less coherent.
As for the fact that bhikkhu bodhi is critical of the commentaries that doesn't hold any weight with me.

[Mkoll]

so are the texts incoherent?

IMO, the texts are coherent enough that one can use them as a basis for Dhamma practice, preferably with the help of wise teachers. And in that case, they've served their purpose. What is most important for oneself is what the words that comprise the texts are pointing to in one's mind and experience, not the words themselves. And of course the texts are of utmost importance to preserve for the sake of future followers of Dhamma. We are very fortunate to be born in circumstances where they're available to so many and hopefully this state will continue for a long time to come.

[Sekha]

Simply because some people reject the explanations doesn't make them less coherent.

Well that makes them to some extent incoherent for such people. So it seems to me that the OP's question gets translated to that of the relevance of such interpretations. I think it is well established that some suttas have been tampered with, so it would not be surprising to find slight incoherences here and there. But we generally don't see what we don't want to find.

I think MN 76 has something to say about this :

Furthermore, Sandaka, now a certain teacher is one who goes by a tradition, who takes a tradition for the truth. He teaches a Dhamma in conformity with what he has heard, through what has been transmitted dogmatically, through what has been handed down in a collection of texts. But when a teacher goes by a tradition, taking a tradition for the truth, some is well transmitted, some is ill transmitted, some is factual and some is otherwise.

[daverupa]

For an example of things that are simply wrong, or in contradiction: there is the issue about women's ordination, and how Ananda is said to have asked the Buddha about it - but, the nun's order pre-existed Ananda's ordination.

For an example of things that are built up by Tradition but absent from the early years: there is the issue about the Buddha's omniscience.

So, the texts aren't incoherent, but nor are they in perfect accord in every respect.

[robertk]

For an example of things that are simply wrong, or in contradiction: there is the issue about women's ordination, and how Ananda is said to have asked the Buddha about it - but, the nun's order pre-existed Ananda's ordination.

For an example of things that are built up by Tradition but absent from the early years: there is the issue about the Buddha's omniscience.

So, the texts aren't incoherent, but nor are they in perfect accord in every respect.

I doubt that the nuns order predated Ananda joining the sangha?

[cooran]

Hello all,

It was Gotami and Ananda who had to ask the Buddha several times before he agreed to the allow women to become Nuns:
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/bud ... 23lbud.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

With metta,
Chris

[daverupa]

Hmm...

A close inspection of the account of the foundation of the order of nuns brings to light several inconsistencies...

Another problem is a chronological one, a problem that to my knowledge so far has not been noticed by other scholars. According to what can be gleaned from the relevant sources, the foundation of the order of nuns would have taken place in the 5th or 6th year of the Buddha's ministry. A closer examination of the canonical sources brings to light that at this early point of time Ananda still had to become the Buddha's attendant, in fact he still had to ordain. This makes it impossible for him to act as an intermediary in the way his role is depicted in the different Vinayas.

So...yeah...

[robertk]

Hmm...

A close inspection of the account of the foundation of the order of nuns brings to light several inconsistencies...

Another problem is a chronological one, a problem that to my knowledge so far has not been noticed by other scholars. According to what can be gleaned from the relevant sources, the foundation of the order of nuns would have taken place in the 5th or 6th year of the Buddha's ministry. A closer examination of the canonical sources brings to light that at this early point of time Ananda still had to become the Buddha's attendant, in fact he still had to ordain. This makes it impossible for him to act as an intermediary in the way his role is depicted in the different Vinayas.

So...yeah...

So.. Yeah in over 2600 years none of the bhikkhu reciters of the texts have noted this supposed anomaly ( until now). Probably they didnt notice because it is curious fabrication - by whom I am not sure.

[daverupa]

So, not addressing the points but instead casting aspersions. Well, it's what I expected, I suppose.

I encourage others to read and educate themselves.

[robertk]

So, not addressing the points but instead casting aspersions. Well, it's what I expected, I suppose.

I encourage others to read and educate themselves.

What point are you talking about?
Or are you saying that the quote you gave is the evidence?

Of course the Buddha knew that he would establish the bhikkuni order from the beginning, the Commentaries say as much.
But they also explain why he showed reluctance to ananda and his stepmother- knowing the problems - and the importance of the 8 garuka dhamma, which helped to mitigate the problems. He neded all to willingly accept those - and so pajapati was happy to agree to them, once he relented.
We are talking about the Buddha's omniscience, and one who knows exactly the right way to establish vinaya, and protect the bhikkhu and bhikkuni order.

[daverupa]

So, not addressing the points but instead casting aspersions. Well, it's what I expected, I suppose.

I encourage others to read and educate themselves.

What point are you talking about?

The points Analayo mentions in the linked article, whence the quote.

Of course the Buddha knew... We are talking about the Buddha's omniscience...

I linked a paper about that topic, as well...

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Reading the texts is good, but it is easy to misinterpret them. Insulting others by telling them to read the suttas is not right speech.

Chronicle data is missing from the texts, and one has to do some careful study before drawing any conclusions. Even, after careful study, one cannot be too sure about the facts.

Venerable Ānanda was ordained about two years after the Enlightenment, when the Buddha first visited Kapilavatthu. This was together with Devadatta, Anuruddha, and Upāli.

Pajāpāti and Mahāmāyā were sisters. King Suddhodana married both the sisters, and when Mahāmāyā died, seven days after the birth of the Buddha, Pajāpati looked after the Buddha and nursed him. She was the mother of Nanda, but it is said that she gave her own son to nurses and herself nursed the Buddha. The Buddha was at Vesāli when Suddhodana died, and Pajāpatī decided to renounce the world, and waited for an opportunity to ask the permission of the Buddha.

Pajāpatī was already a Stream-winner. She attained this eminence when the Buddha first visited his father’s palace and taught the Mahādhammapāla Jātaka (DhA.i.97).

Her opportunity came when the Buddha visited Kapilavatthu to settle the dispute between the Sākyā and the Koliyā as to the right to take water from the river Rohiṇī. When the dispute had been settled, the Buddha taught the Kalahavivāda Sutta, and five hundred young Sākyan men joined the Order. Their wives, led by Pajāpatī, went to the Buddha and asked leave to be ordained as nuns. This leave the Buddha refused, and he went on to Vesāli. However, Pajāpatī and her companions, nothing daunted, had barbers to cut off their hair, and donning yellow robes, followed the Buddha to Vesāli on foot.

So, from this account it seems that the ordination of the nuns was some time after the ordination of Ānanda. Did Ānanda have to be the Buddha's personal attendant to intervene on behalf of the nuns? He was the Buddha cousin, after all, and also related to Mahāpajāpati.

[daverupa]

I still encourage others to read & educate themselves; this is wrong speech? You've heard what wasn't said, Bhante.

---

https://www.buddhismuskunde.uni-hamburg ... dation.pdf

"Theories on the Foundation of the Nuns' Order – A Critical Evaluation", by Analayo

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

Should we tell Venerable Anālayo to educate himself by reading the texts? He obviously has done, but for some reason he thinks that Ānanda was not ordained when the Bhikkhuni Sangha was established. It is easy to make errors because there is no chronological data in the texts.

I know what you wrote.

I encourage others to read and educate themselves.

What is that but not insulting and casting aspersions because Robert did not agree with you?

I also do not agree with you. Ānanda and Rāhula were ordained while Suddhodana was still alive. His wife, Pajāpatī would not have been free to go-forth while the king was still living, unless he gave his permission? Would she dare to ask for it after seeing his grief over the ordination of Rāhula?

The DPPN is a good source of biological data, and some chronological data as is the Venerable Nārada's the Buddha and His Teachings.

[daverupa]

In the case of the attitude towards women, we find contradictory positions and thus a lack of consistency in the Pāli canon. One example is the account of the foundation of the order of nuns.

According to the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta,soon after his awakening the Buddha proclaimed that he would not pass away until he had nun disciples who are wise and learned. From this it would follow that right from the outset he wanted to have an order of nuns. This impression is further supported by a closer perusal of the Pāli canon, which shows recurrent references to the importance of having four assemblies of disciples (monks, nuns, male and female lay followers) and to the significant contribution made by nuns to the prosperity and success of the Buddha’s dispensation.

These passages stand in contrast to the impression created by the account of the foundation of the order of nuns, which reads as if the Buddha did not want to allow women to go forth. A comparative study of this account in the different Vinayas, mainly extant in Chinese, shows clear signs of later addition and thus makes it probable that it does not accurately reflect the Buddha’s attitude.