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

Textual analysis and comparative discussion on early Buddhist sects and scriptures.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22387
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 »

frank k wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 9:33 am
It’s quite clear that you struggle with even basic sense restraint let alone anything else, which calls into question your self proclaimed guardianship of the true Dhamma. You don’t protect the Dhamma by acting like you do. You don’t know how to protect the Dhamma.
“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.”
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

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

Post by Pulsar »

frank k wrote
Your assumptions, line of thinking, are completely incomprehensible to me.
It seems
  • Buddha's line of thinking that rupa in nama rupa is a mental activity and is not physical (pre buddhist thinking) was completely incomprehensible to the vibajjavadins (late sectarian)
who wrote suttas like DN 22/MN10 mixing truth and lies, just as much as truth and lies can be found in the two veddala suttas MN 43 and MN 44 where body is defined as breath body.
I cannot find Buddha saying anything of this sort in the Samyukta nikaya..In the Samyutta Nikaya? yes but that is in the Citta Samyutta. Scholars agree that this entire Samyutta is a late concoction. If so who is the culprit? Not V. Sujato but the Vibajjjavadins.
Once rupa/body in Nama-rupa was accepted as physical, it did not take long for the tradition to import the lie into Satipatthana sutta. DN 22, and rest of the canon.
  • Meditation is supposed to gradually stop the ills or suffering of the mind.
  • Yet one who meditates using the physical body as the target for the alleviation of their suffering, can they gradually stop cancerous growth of cells in the body? can they reverse the broken heart syndrome? which is a body part.
  • Satipatthana bhavana cannot cure such, but it takes care of the reasons why ills appear in the mind.
Buddha was not like Jivaka, Buddha's physician, who helped cure the ills of the body.
  • Buddha helped heal the mind, not the body. Why do we fail to give him credit for this?

If, we as recipients of his teachings were to continue to miscomprehend his most critical teachings as Vibajjavadins (a late sectarian school) did what benefit will it bring to the forum?
Dearest frank k, I will not interact with you personally, but I will point out the misconceptions you propagate for the benefit of those in the forum, when I have the time.
I bear no ill-will towards you. May the truth of Dhamma dawn upon you! I know that one voice cannot drown, a million nay-sayers. May the truth win ultimately!
With love :candle:
auto
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

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

Post by auto »

Pulsar wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:56 am ..
Vibhanga
parenthesis is translator comment(doesn't occur in pali).
https://suttacentral.net/vb12/en/thittila wrote: he, desireless of zest, dwells equable, mindful, aware, and he experiences pleasure by way of the body (of mental aggregates); this the Noble Ones declare, “The equable, mindful dweller in pleasure”; he attains and dwells in the third jhāna;
wrote:“Experiences pleasure by way of the body (of mental aggregates)” means: Therein what is pleasure? That which is mental ease, mental pleasure, easeful pleasant experience born of mental contact, easeful pleasant feeling born of mental contact.

This is called pleasure.

Therein what is the body (of mental aggregates)? The aggregate of perception, aggregate of mental concomitants, aggregate of consciousness. This is called the body (of mental aggregates). This pleasure he experiences by way of this body (of mental aggregates). Therefore this is called “experiences pleasure by way of the body (of mental aggregates)”.

Therein what is the body (of mental aggregates)? The aggregate of perception, aggregate of mental concomitants, aggregate of consciousness. This is called the body (of mental aggregates). This pleasure he experiences by way of this body (of mental aggregates). Therefore this is called “experiences pleasure by way of the body (of mental aggregates)”.
passadhi enlightenment factor,
https://suttacentral.net/vb10/en/thittila wrote:Therein what is calmness-enlightenment-factor? There is calmness of the body (of mental aggregates); there is calmness of consciousness. That which is calmness of body, that calmness-enlightenment-factor is for full knowledge, for enlightenment, for full emancipation also. That which is calmness of conscious| ness; that calmness-enlightenment-factor is for full knowledge, for enlightenment, for full emancipation also.

Tattha katamo passaddhi­s­amboj­jha­­ṅ­go­? Atthi kāyapassaddhi, atthi cittapassaddhi. Yadapi kāyapassaddhi tadapi passaddhi­s­amboj­jha­­ṅgo abhiññāya sambodhāya nibbānāya saṁvattati. Yadapi cittapassaddhi tadapi passaddhi­s­amboj­jha­­ṅgo abhiññāya sambodhāya nibbānāya saṁvattati.
What is Vibhanga,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibha%E1%B9%85ga wrote:The Vibhaṅga is a Buddhist scripture, part of the Pali Canon of Theravada Buddhism, where it is included in the Abhidhamma Pitaka.

A typical chapter is divided into three parts:

Sutta method: often consisting of quotations from the Sutta Pitaka
Abhidhamma method: various lists of synonyms, numerical classifications
Question method: applies the matika (matrix) of the Dhammasangani
In case of supermundane absorption and mindfulness/satipatthana thereon, there are external objects, these objects are invisible, immeasurable and formless.
Read yourself about that chapter, and make your conclusions.
https://suttacentral.net/vb7/en/anandajoti wrote:Four Ways of Attending to Mindfulness:

Here a monk dwells contemplating (the nature of) the body in the body in regard to himself, he dwells contemplating (the nature of) the body in the body in regard to others, he dwells contemplating (the nature of) the body in the body in regard to himself and in regard to others, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, after removing avarice and sorrow regarding the world.
..
At first glance, he is contemplating the body. But i think it means contemplation on mental concomitants what are with the external objects. Basing it on what is written in the chapter.
wrote:Are any with sense-objects? Are any without sense-objects?

(They are) with sense-objects.

Are any consciousness? Are any not consciousness?

(They are) not consciousness.

Are any mental factors? Are any not mental factors?

(They are) mental factors.

..
User avatar
Zom
Posts: 2712
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Russia, Saint-Petersburg
Contact:

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

Post by Zom »

One who “enters the stream” is one who has completed all eight
factors of the noble eightfold path, including jhānas.
And this is an incorrect Sujato's statement, as there is a number of suttas that clearly shows that only a non-returner or an arahant needs a jhana.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
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 »

frank k wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 9:33 am But if you know for a fact a teacher is committing wrong, and you remain silent, that is wrong speech, wrong action, wrong view, wrong livelihood.
Well sure, but it's only wrong speech if your view is the correct one and they knew that this was the case.

I'm not sure why you can't simply accept that different people have come to different conclusions. Your insistence that everyone else should change to agree with you does not leave any room for useful discussion.

:heart:
Mike
waryoffolly
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:30 pm

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

Post by waryoffolly »

frank k wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 9:23 am
Hi Mike,
I didn't set out to call out deceit and hypocrisy (attributes of lack of sincerity).
What I set out to do, was defend proper interpretation of EBT jhana, which Sujato claims to do, yet he blatantly ignores the many passages that contradict his thesis. In the otherwise nice essay of his in the OP, you may not have noticed he still continues to assert his interpretation of jhana and samadhi as a fact, as if it's well supported by a natural reading of the EBT.
If that's not deceit, then what is it? He's been made aware privately and publicly of the detailed arguments disproving his interpretation.
It’s extremely difficult as a normal human being to carefully investigate evidence contrary to one’s view. And when I say this, I’m not speaking only of Ajahn Sujato-I’m speaking of each and every one of us with flawed, limited, and incomplete knowledge. Including you.

When I post things similar to what you posted here it is deeply painful for me. I get the sense you are tremendously frustrated and annoyed with modern theravada. That frustration is dukkha. Please look carefully into the dukkha you feel when posting things like this.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

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

Post by Pulsar »

Zom wrote
One who “enters the stream” is one who has completed all eight
factors of the noble eightfold path, including jhānas.
And this is an incorrect Sujato's statement, as there is a number of suttas that clearly shows that only a non-returner or an arahant needs a jhana.
Can you name some suttas that say an Arahant needs jhana? Can anyone enter the stream without having practiced Satipatthana?
Regards :candle:
asahi
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 4:23 pm

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

Post by asahi »

The noble eight fold path would necessary include "right" samadhi but not necessarily would include jhana .
No bashing No gossiping
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 »

It will be better to state your view points with the support of concreate details, not full of opinions and generalisations without factual details needed to support them.

:candle: :reading: :jumping:
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

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

Post by frank k »

I'm losing more respect for you every time we interact. Your response shows you did not read what I wrote directly to you (quoting you in response, making short and succinct points that are straightforward and easy to comprehend), or worse, you just went through the motions of reading and didn't bother paying attention.

I accept people are going to come to different conclusions, it's the WAY they do it that matters.
I can give you examples of several ways that I could advocate the same jhana interpretation as Sujato, but do it in an honorable and honest way that would avoid any charges of misconduct, deceit, fraudulence, etc.

But I'd probably be wasting my time.
mikenz66 wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 8:15 pm
frank k wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 9:33 am But if you know for a fact a teacher is committing wrong, and you remain silent, that is wrong speech, wrong action, wrong view, wrong livelihood.
Well sure, but it's only wrong speech if your view is the correct one and they knew that this was the case.

I'm not sure why you can't simply accept that different people have come to different conclusions. Your insistence that everyone else should change to agree with you does not leave any room for useful discussion.

:heart:
Mike
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

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

Post by frank k »

There are plenty of controversial, ambiguous, legitimately debatable issues in Buddhism.
And one should tread cautiously as you suggest to avoid prematurely drawing conclusions on those issues.
There are a number of EBT jhana interpretations that can be supported by EBT.
But there is absolutely no uncertainty that Sujato's interpretation is wrong. Much worse actually, wronger than wrong.

The differing legitimate EBT jhana interpretations existing, would be like saying 2 + 2 < 4.5

Sujato, Brahm, and VIsm. redefinition of jhana, is like saying 2 + 2 > 100.
I have no qualms, no hesitation, zero dukkha in pointing out the wrongness of that. (The dukkha comes from overestimating the intelligence, rationality of people's ability to discern right from wrong).

I should add that I spent more than 10 years studying the jhana controversy in great detail before arriving at a conclusion, and ascertaining this controversy is one that does have a bounded range of legitimate interpretations, evaluating every single passage before drawing this conclusion, and I spent more than 4 years interacting with Sujato and trying to draw out his best defense of his jhana interpretation.


waryoffolly wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:09 am
frank k wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 9:23 am
Hi Mike,
I didn't set out to call out deceit and hypocrisy (attributes of lack of sincerity).
What I set out to do, was defend proper interpretation of EBT jhana, which Sujato claims to do, yet he blatantly ignores the many passages that contradict his thesis. In the otherwise nice essay of his in the OP, you may not have noticed he still continues to assert his interpretation of jhana and samadhi as a fact, as if it's well supported by a natural reading of the EBT.
If that's not deceit, then what is it? He's been made aware privately and publicly of the detailed arguments disproving his interpretation.
It’s extremely difficult as a normal human being to carefully investigate evidence contrary to one’s view. And when I say this, I’m not speaking only of Ajahn Sujato-I’m speaking of each and every one of us with flawed, limited, and incomplete knowledge. Including you.

When I post things similar to what you posted here it is deeply painful for me. I get the sense you are tremendously frustrated and annoyed with modern theravada. That frustration is dukkha. Please look carefully into the dukkha you feel when posting things like this.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
User avatar
frank k
Posts: 2247
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 4:55 pm
Contact:

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

Post by frank k »

mikenz66 wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 8:15 pm ... Your insistence that everyone else should change to agree with you does not leave any room for useful discussion. ...

:heart:
Mike
And where did I do that Mike?
What I do actually say, is that if someone is going to claim their jhana interpretation is EBT, that it would require demonstrating coherence in the key EBT sutta passages, such as the ones I listed. People are welcome to discuss and come to different conclusions on those passages, but they are required to show coherence in their interpretation, rather than cherry pick only 2 passages and ignore the 20 passages that contradict their interpretation.
www.lucid24.org/sted : ☸Lucid24.org🐘 STED definitions
www.audtip.org/audtip: 🎙️🔊Audio Tales in Pāli: ☸Dharma and Vinaya in many languages
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 »

It will be better, in a paragraph it has a topic sentence, supporting sentences, and/or a concluding sentence. Only one main topic is in a paragraph; others are supporting the main topic/point in a paragraph. This structure could help you to present your viewpoints clearly and precisely! Make sure that you state your viewpoints with the support of concreate details, not full of opinions and generalisations without factual details needed to support them. :candle:
waryoffolly
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:30 pm

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

Post by waryoffolly »

frank k wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:09 pm I have no qualms, no hesitation, zero dukkha in pointing out the wrongness of that. (The dukkha comes from overestimating the intelligence, rationality of people's ability to discern right from wrong).
Then please look closely into the dukkha of overestimating the 'intelligence, [and] rationality of people's ability to discern right from wrong'. Free your mind from this suffering Frank, it's a burden. I'm speaking here from personal experience as well.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
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 »

frank k wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:28 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Wed Feb 02, 2022 8:15 pm ... Your insistence that everyone else should change to agree with you does not leave any room for useful discussion. ...

:heart:
Mike
And where did I do that Mike?
What I do actually say, is that if someone is going to claim their jhana interpretation is EBT, that it would require demonstrating coherence in the key EBT sutta passages, such as the ones I listed. People are welcome to discuss and come to different conclusions on those passages, but they are required to show coherence in their interpretation, rather than cherry pick only 2 passages and ignore the 20 passages that contradict their interpretation.
It's not as if noone has engaged with your, here or on Sutta Central. You think their interpretations are incorrect, and they think that yours are incorrect. Your demand that everyone should agree with you, and go out and correct everyone who disagrees with you, is completely unrealistic.

:heart:
Mike
Post Reply