Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by Eko Care »

A. Bhikkhu wrote: Thu May 12, 2022 11:42 am
frank k wrote: Everything we have inherited from the ancient sanghas is hear say, unconfirmed. So I'm open to any new evidence and will change my mind instantly if evidence is compelling. Ultimately, it's not even Buddha Gotama I'm loyal to, the only allegiance I have is to truth.
I don't see how this is true about the hearsay, unless you really believe that Theravādins have throughout the millennia up to the present day, incl. most bhikkhus from Burma, Thailand, Sri Lanka etc. nowadays, all completely missed it about jhāna and have no practical experience on the basis of the commentarial understanding. It has already stood the test of time and essentially doesn't need any modern-day interpretations from people who don't even read, let alone completely understand the commentaries, usually with much less time and effort devoted to actual practice.

frank k wrote: I admit that commentaries provide an alternative account, but despite objectively and giving it fair review, I don't find the commentaries (in their entirety) equally cogent. There are inconsistencies, contradictions. They're incoherent (in their entirety).
Didn't you already say that you haven't even read all of them? Interestingly, scholars who do seem to read and understand them, approaching them with an open mind, grant them that they have this power of at least providing an equally cogent alternative, like Rupert Gethin (The Buddhist Path to Awakening, p. xiii).
One of the things I suggested in my conclusion was that before we throw away the Abhidhamma and the commentaries, we need to be very sure we have understood what is is they are saying, and how it is they are actually interpreting earlier texts. What prompted that suggestion then was a sense that in dealing with the theory of the Buddhist path in the Nikāyas scholars had tended to dismiss the views of the Abhidhamma and commentaries without fully understanding them. Yet my own investigation of the treatment of the bodhi-pakkhiyādhammā in the Nikāyas and abhidhamma/abhidharma texts had led me to the conclusion that in fact, while the understanding of the later texts might not be precisely the same in all matters of detail, it was, when worked out and carefully considered, broadly consistent with what is found in the Nikāyas. [...] my study does at least [...] place a question mark against some of the claims of 'contradiction' and 'inconsistency' in the way the texts (the Pali Nikāyas, the Abhidhamma, and the commentaries) present the theory of Buddhist meditation.
I agree with him in that this is how they present themselves to me as well when carefully considered. What "late" means is again up to debate.
If one claims the Abhidhamma and Commentaries are "inconsistent",
then we can be sure that the claimer is not intelligent at least.
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by frank k »

Eko Care wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 6:39 pm ...
If one claims the Abhidhamma and Commentaries are "inconsistent",
then we can be sure that the claimer is not intelligent at least.
If one has the intelligence and powers of logic to come to that conclusion, we can see what kind of intellect Abhidhamma and commentaries tend to attract.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
analysis
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2022 9:47 pm

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by analysis »

Eko Care wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 6:39 pm
What prompted that suggestion then was a sense that in dealing with the theory of the Buddhist path in the Nikāyas scholars had tended to dismiss the views of the Abhidhamma and commentaries without fully understanding them. Yet my own investigation of the treatment of the bodhi-pakkhiyādhammā in the Nikāyas and abhidhamma/abhidharma texts had led me to the conclusion that in fact, while the understanding of the later texts might not be precisely the same in all matters of detail, it was, when worked out and carefully considered, broadly consistent with what is found in the Nikāyas. [...] my study does at least [...] place a question mark against some of the claims of 'contradiction' and 'inconsistency' in the way the texts (the Pali Nikāyas, the Abhidhamma, and the commentaries) present the theory of Buddhist meditation.
So is his conclusion something like:
"Whether you agree with Abhidhamma and commentaries or not, you can't say that they are not consistent with Suttas."?
Jack19990101
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by Jack19990101 »

The problem with commentary, is not commentary itself.
It is the manner it is being supported in exclusion of all other commentaries made by other or later Buddha followers.

Commentary should be an open system, Sutta is to be a closed system.
Otherwise, closed commentary system would be like a lever long enough to overshadow sutta.
Jack19990101
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by Jack19990101 »

P.S - above is about commentary, not abhidhamma.
I know too little about abhidhamma to make any comments on it.
dharmacorps
Posts: 2298
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by dharmacorps »

Eko Care wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 6:39 pm
If one claims the Abhidhamma and Commentaries are "inconsistent",
then we can be sure that the claimer is not intelligent at least.
"I like X. Therefore, anyone who doesn't like X is stupid. (Because I am smart)."

Schoolyard logic. You'll have to do better if you want to come off an intelligent abhidhamma crusader and crush us infidels.
Jack19990101
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by Jack19990101 »

Often, supporters of closed commentary, dismisses others for being unable to find inconsistence between commentary & sutta.

I don't know commentary details enough to know it.
But there are other interpretations/commentaries, which are not against Sutta neither.
but they are against current commentary.

Thus - current commentary is consistent with Sutta, even it is true, it is not logical to eliminate other interpretation, as long as other interpretation is abiding to sutta too.
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by BrokenBones »

dharmacorps wrote: Thu Sep 08, 2022 8:16 pm
Eko Care wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 6:39 pm
If one claims the Abhidhamma and Commentaries are "inconsistent",
then we can be sure that the claimer is not intelligent at least.
"I like X. Therefore, anyone who doesn't like X is stupid. (Because I am smart)."

Schoolyard logic. You'll have to do better if you want to come off an intelligent abhidhamma crusader and crush us infidels.
😂

You sometimes get the impression that they regret they can't issue a fatwah.

I too have little acquaintance with the bare Abhidhamma but the little I have makes me consider a dozen root canals preferable to reading a chapter of their lists.

I do have a greater acquaintance with the commentaries which I consider are sometimes good, bad or bloody awful.

As for the Commentaries, obviously they should be an open casket. The fact they're not implies a weakness and a romanticised view of the 'Elders' and the 'Ancients'... as if wisdom & logic suddenly ceased at a set point in the midsts of time.

It's pure sectarianism and fortunately in the West and increasingly in the East, such dogmatism doesn't wash.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by robertk »

As for the Commentaries, obviously they should be an open casket. The fact they're not implies a weakness and a romanticised view of the 'Elders' and the 'Ancients'... as if wisdom & logic suddenly ceased at a set point in the midsts of time
.
How can the Commentary be an "open casket".The meaning and truth of the Dhamma doesn't change over time.
IB Horner, PALI TEXT SOCIETY, writes
"
"The prime object of every Commentary is to make the meanings of the words and
phrases in the canonical passages it is elucidating abundantly clear, definite, definitive even....This is to preserve the Teachings of the Buddha as nearly as possible in the sense intended, and as conveyed by the succession of teachers, acariyaparama. Always there were detractors, always there were and still are "improvers" ready with their own notions. Through friends and enemies alike deleterous change and deterioration in the word of the Buddha might intervene for an indefinite length of time. The Commentaries are the armour and protection against such an eventuality. AS they hold a unique position as preservers and interpreters of true Dhamma, it is essential not only to follow them carefully and adopt the meaning they ascribe to a word or phrase each time they commnet on it. They are as closed now as is the Pali canon. No aditions to their corpus or subtractions from it are to contemplated, and no commentary written in later days could be included in it
."" Horner. pxiii Clarifier of the Sweet Meaning" PAli Text Society 1978
Jack19990101
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by Jack19990101 »

That is based on a single gigantic assumption that
The single set of commentary has uncovered exactness of Sutta, plus extra lucidity.

That means it is Sutta upgrade. Sutta is secondary to The Commentary.

And I think there are many who do treat The Commentary as enhanced Sutta version.

But how to explain away the other interpretations, which is too consistent with Sutta, yet it is opposing The Commentary.
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by BrokenBones »

For some, the illustriousness of the Commentaries seems to outshine the suttas. The suttas for the most part don't need commentary and when they do they don't need sectarian dogma overlaying what may indeed be a 'good commentary'.

I never recall the Buddha identifying commentaries as having a special place in his teaching...

"Therefore, did we say, Kalamas, what was said thus, 'Come Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, "The monk is our teacher." Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," enter on and abide in them.'

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/aut ... el008.html

I think that if people can find the above in the commentaries then more power to them but they shouldn't try passing them off as pure Buddhadhamma and insist on their contents as being sacrosanct.
Jack19990101
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 4:40 am

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by Jack19990101 »

I am sure Ven Buddhaghosa doesn't mean to, but
the loyal supporters of The Commentary is positioning it as replacement of Sutta or at least some discourses, albeit without intention or being conscious of.

That is the direction de facto going, we loud bang utensils upon the sight of alternative interpretations.

Two sets of doctrines, we tried to say one is fully abiding to another with exactness. Then only one can survive. Which one to survive? the one with more readers.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

Since this isn't a real topic with a real topic question, I'm going to move it to the General section, where it can at least be discussed from all sides.

The custom parameters of the Classical Theravada exist so as to enable unfettered exploration of the Commentarial perspective... not to serve as a protected bunker from which to take pot shots at the intelligence of others.

:thanks:

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."
BrokenBones
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by BrokenBones »

retrofuturist wrote: Fri Sep 09, 2022 5:21 am Greetings,

Since this isn't a real topic with a real topic question, I'm going to move it to the General section, where it can at least be discussed from all sides.

The custom parameters of the Classical Theravada exist so as to enable unfettered exploration of the Commentarial perspective... not to serve as a protected bunker from which to take pot shots at the intelligence of others.

:thanks:

Metta,
Paul. :)
My bad... I should really check the section I'm in before posting ☺️
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: Rupert Gethin: I place a question mark against the claims of ‘inconsistency’ of Abhidhamma and Commentaries

Post by Pulsar »

I am curious about the OP.
Do you know when Rupert Gethin placed this question mark, can you provide us with the original text? Which year?
One time he listed himself as a Thervadin buddhist, lately he claims to be mostly a buddhist.
Couldn't Gethin have changed his mind over the years?
The last I heard was about his forthcoming book,
Buddhist Maps of the Mind and Body: A study of Indian Buddhist thought in the Theravāda, Sarvāstivāda and Yogācāra Abhidharma
Does anyone know whether the book is out yet? Perhaps Gethin removed the question mark after further studies.
Gethin also wrote that current Theravada meditation is not how Buddha's Disciples meditated.
Looks like Gethin places question marks on more than one thing.
Regards :candle:
Post Reply