Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Exploring the Dhamma, as understood from the perspective of the ancient Pali commentaries.
User avatar
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

retrofuturist wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 6:59 am Yet, the body of Pali works kept growing and growing for centuries, and didn't stop when the Buddha stopped. Firstly, there were centuries until a line was drawn under the Canon. Why that amount of time - why not shorter, why not longer?
Not too considerably, actually. You may adduce the Parivāra and the Kathāvatthu, which are obvious cases. Although the late dating of the rest of the works is highly questionable and shaky, which a number of fair scholars actually admit.
retrofuturist wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 6:59 am And would those who regard the Theravada interpretation as "the" interpretation, chastise, ostracize and exclude someone who spent their life studing the Sutta Pitaka and Vinaya Pitaka and putting those teachings and disciplines into practice?
I think the problem lies in the fact that, speaking from personal experience, these actions of chastising etc. can happen on both sides. Certainly never a good idea to engage in any kind of personal attacks, which we can agree on irrespective of school identity. I personally would have no issue with someone saying that he is a little confused on what to believe nowadays about what buddhavacana consists of and what not and then chooses to just stick to the Dīghanikāya or something to put it into practice, while desisting from looking down upon the Theravāda with little to no actual understanding even.

What is unfortunately rampant nowadays is the firm conviction that the Theravāda is wrong in its believes and, based upon that it, it is frequently attacked; it really is. It has been battered almost like nothing else. This poor Ven. Buddhaghosa is one of the most scapegoated bhikkhus in modernity, at least as the West is concerned, almost like a sport nowadays to let off steam. One of the most vicious to defend their viewpoints are modern-day Suttantikas (for the lack of a better term, if you don't identify with it).
retrofuturist wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 6:59 am The Classical section will no longer be used to take pot-shots at everyone else, and if people persist with that, then topics will be moved to the General Theravada section, so there's a level playing field, and if necessary, action will be taken in accordance with Section 2f of the Terms of Service.
Not sure what you exactly mean by "pot-shots", but it sounds fair enough if you do the same when someone starts to go on a rant on how non-sensical or what not Buddhaghosa, the commentaries and the Abhidhamma is.
Last edited by Ṭhānuttamo on Wed May 04, 2022 12:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22410
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Ceisiwr »

A. Bhikkhu wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 12:15 pm This poor Ven. Buddhaghosa is one of the most scapegoated bhikkhus in modernity, at least as the West is concerned, almost like a sport nowadays to let off steam. One of the most vicious to defend their viewpoints are modern-day Suttantikas (for the lack of a better term, if you don't identify with it).
I agree. He gets a lot of flack for no reason. You even get a weird kind of bigotry against him because he was possibly a Brahmin. In comparison Sujato, someone who agrees with Venerable Buddhaghosa on some things and not on others, has this to say
Nothing in this attests to Buddhaghoas’s personal views being added to the commentaries. He was, by all available evidence, a careful and cautious scholar, who did not step beyond the bounds of his sources. If only more were like him!
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/su ... msi/9949/9
“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: 22410
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Ceisiwr »

I recently watched these videos by Sujato on YouTube that others might find interesting

“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
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 12:23 pm I agree. He gets a lot of flack for no reason. You even get a weird kind of bigotry against him because he was possibly a Brahmin. In comparison Sujato, someone who agrees with Venerable Buddhaghosa on some things and not on others, has this to say
Nothing in this attests to Buddhaghoas’s personal views being added to the commentaries. He was, by all available evidence, a careful and cautious scholar, who did not step beyond the bounds of his sources. If only more were like him!
https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/su ... msi/9949/9
These sound like fair statements to me. Thanks for sharing his and your personal brief account!
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Eko Care »

A. Bhikkhu wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 12:15 pm I think the problem lies in the fact that, speaking from personal experience, these actions of chastising etc. can happen on both sides. Certainly never a good idea to engage in any kind of personal attacks, which we can agree on irrespective of school identity. I personally would have no issue with someone saying that he is a little confused on what to believe nowadays about what buddhavacana consists of and what not and then chooses to just stick to the Dīghanikāya or something to put it into practice, while desisting from looking down upon the Theravāda with little to no actual understanding even.

What is unfortunately rampant nowadays is the firm conviction that the Theravāda is wrong in its believes and, based upon that it, it is frequently attacked; it really is. It has been battered almost like nothing else. This poor Ven. Buddhaghosa is one of the most scapegoated bhikkhus in modernity, at least as the West is concerned, almost like a sport nowadays to let off steam. One of the most vicious to defend their viewpoints are modern-day Suttantikas (for the lack of a better term, if you don't identify with it).
:goodpost:
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings bhante,

Thanks for your response. I just wanted to clarify one aspect of it...
retrofuturist wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 6:59 am The Classical section will no longer be used to take pot-shots at everyone else, and if people persist with that, then topics will be moved to the General Theravada section, so there's a level playing field, and if necessary, action will be taken in accordance with Section 2f of the Terms of Service.
A. Bhikkhu wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 12:15 pmNot sure what you exactly mean by "pot-shots", but it sounds fair enough if you do the same when someone starts to go on a rant on how non-sensical or what not Buddhaghosa, the commentaries and the Abhidhamma is.
Per Section 4 of the Terms of Service, there's a general provision that "at Dhamma Wheel, we respect your intellectual and spiritual autonomy. As such, the staff here will not enforce reverence to anyone or anything, nor censor speech gratuitously."

However, we treat the Classical Theravada and Abhidhamma sections a little differently per their guidelines, which state that "the Abhidhamma and Classical Theravada sub-forums are specialized venues for the discussion of the Abhidhamma and the classical Mahavihara understanding of the Dhamma. Within these forums the Pali Tipitaka and its commentaries are for discussion purposes treated as authoritative"

The purpose of the second sentence in those custom guidelines is to support the first sentence, however rather than focusing on the first, some members have recently been misusing that protection to violate Terms of Service, section 2f relating to "personal attacks, including the vilification of members based on their approach to the Dhamma (e.g. their practices, level of experience, or chosen tradition)". That is specifically what we're clamping down on.

So within the bounds of the Classical Theravada and Abhidhamma sections, Buddhaghosa et.al. will be regarded as the interpretation of the Dhamma, not subject to challenge, whereas outside it, they are typically regarded as an interpretation, subject to challenge, like any other.

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: 1785
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by BrokenBones »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 1:02 am Greetings bhante,

Thanks for your response. I just wanted to clarify one aspect of it...
retrofuturist wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 6:59 am The Classical section will no longer be used to take pot-shots at everyone else, and if people persist with that, then topics will be moved to the General Theravada section, so there's a level playing field, and if necessary, action will be taken in accordance with Section 2f of the Terms of Service.
A. Bhikkhu wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 12:15 pmNot sure what you exactly mean by "pot-shots", but it sounds fair enough if you do the same when someone starts to go on a rant on how non-sensical or what not Buddhaghosa, the commentaries and the Abhidhamma is.
Per Section 4 of the Terms of Service, there's a general provision that "at Dhamma Wheel, we respect your intellectual and spiritual autonomy. As such, the staff here will not enforce reverence to anyone or anything, nor censor speech gratuitously."

However, we treat the Classical Theravada and Abhidhamma sections a little differently per their guidelines, which state that "the Abhidhamma and Classical Theravada sub-forums are specialized venues for the discussion of the Abhidhamma and the classical Mahavihara understanding of the Dhamma. Within these forums the Pali Tipitaka and its commentaries are for discussion purposes treated as authoritative"

The purpose of the second sentence in those custom guidelines is to support the first sentence, however rather than focusing on the first, some members have recently been misusing that protection to violate Terms of Service, section 2f relating to "personal attacks, including the vilification of members based on their approach to the Dhamma (e.g. their practices, level of experience, or chosen tradition)".

So within the bounds of the Classical Theravada and Abhidhamma sections, Buddhaghosa et.al. will be regarded as the interpretation of the Dhamma, not subject to challenge, whereas outside it, they are typically regarded as an interpretation, subject to challenge, like any other.

Metta,
Paul. :)
An excellent move. Please don't delete posts that attack... is it Ebtians? 😂 but like you state... just move the thread.

I have found it increasingly irksome that some members have made much use of this protection to attack others, a lot of which has not simply been along the lines of... 'I'm right you're wrong... 'you must be joking'... 'prove it' etc.(all perfectly acceptable 😉) but have centred on personal insults, kammic consequences and non-sequitur passages that point to the texts own validity by simply declaring it.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings BrokenBones,

Yes, but lest we derail the topic with meta-discussion, let's get...

:focus:

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."
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Eko Care »

retrofuturist wrote: So within the bounds of the Classical Theravada and Abhidhamma sections, Buddhaghosa et.al. will be regarded as the interpretation of the Dhamma, not subject to challenge, whereas outside it, they are typically regarded as an interpretation, subject to challenge, like any other.
So is it to facilitate other Members or Admins to temporarily regard Abhidhamma et.al. as authoritative for joking,
and then switch back into other mode?
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Eko Care,
Eko Care wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 6:03 am
retrofuturist wrote: So within the bounds of the Classical Theravada and Abhidhamma sections, Buddhaghosa et.al. will be regarded as the interpretation of the Dhamma, not subject to challenge, whereas outside it, they are typically regarded as an interpretation, subject to challenge, like any other.
So is it to facilitate other Members or Admins to temporarily regard Abhidhamma et.al. as authoritative for joking,
and then switch back into other mode?
No, it's about what is intended to be discussed here and what is not.

The point is that this is a space where you and others can explore, discuss, explain and ask questions about the Mahavihara view, without the sort of disruptions and challenges that such a conversation would likely face if it were had in other sections of the forum.

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."
User avatar
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

retrofuturist wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 1:02 am "personal attacks, including the vilification of members based on their approach to the Dhamma (e.g. their practices, level of experience, or chosen tradition)"
I agree, that sounds like something that should not be left unchecked ...
User avatar
Ṭhānuttamo
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 1:40 pm
Location: Kefenrod, Germany
Contact:

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Ṭhānuttamo »

BrokenBones wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 2:44 am I have found it increasingly irksome that some members have made much use of this protection to attack others, a lot of which has not simply been along the lines of... 'I'm right you're wrong... 'you must be joking'... 'prove it' etc.(all perfectly acceptable 😉) but have centred on personal insults, kammic consequences and non-sequitur passages that point to the texts own validity by simply declaring it.
I also don't think that personal attacks have a place, wherever that may be. One thing I want to highlight, though, is that this kind of behavior is not exclusive to this section, but can be seen on both sides, in fact probably all sides.
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Eko Care »

retrofuturist wrote: The point is that this is a space where you and others can explore, discuss, explain and ask questions about the Mahavihara view, without the sort of disruptions and challenges that such a conversation would likely face if it were had in other sections of the forum.
May be one can find more disruptions here than other sections, I guess.
BrokenBones wrote: .. passages that point to the texts own validity by simply declaring it.
Is this a disruption or a challenge ?
A. Bhikkhu wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 10:44 am I also don't think that personal attacks have a place, wherever that may be. One thing I want to highlight, though, is that this kind of behavior is not exclusive to this section, but can be seen on both sides, in fact probably all sides.
:goodpost:
BrokenBones
Posts: 1785
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by BrokenBones »

Eko Care wrote: Fri May 06, 2022 2:17 pm
retrofuturist wrote: The point is that this is a space where you and others can explore, discuss, explain and ask questions about the Mahavihara view, without the sort of disruptions and challenges that such a conversation would likely face if it were had in other sections of the forum.
May be one can find more disruptions here than other sections, I guess.
BrokenBones wrote: .. passages that point to the texts own validity by simply declaring it.
Is this a disruption or a challenge ?
A. Bhikkhu wrote: Thu May 05, 2022 10:44 am I also don't think that personal attacks have a place, wherever that may be. One thing I want to highlight, though, is that this kind of behavior is not exclusive to this section, but can be seen on both sides, in fact probably all sides.
:goodpost:
As Retro stated... :focus:
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Well, we, as Theravādins, don't do such things; we leave things as they are, even if it costs something at times.

Post by Eko Care »

Ceisiwr wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 12:23 pm
A. Bhikkhu wrote: Wed May 04, 2022 12:15 pm This poor Ven. Buddhaghosa is one of the most scapegoated bhikkhus in modernity, at least as the West is concerned, almost like a sport nowadays to let off steam. One of the most vicious to defend their viewpoints are modern-day Suttantikas (for the lack of a better term, if you don't identify with it).
I agree. He gets a lot of flack for no reason. ...
Most of them have not read his works either. May be an innate hate??
Post Reply