A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Joe.c
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Joe.c »

justindesilva wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 2:56 am ...
Buddha teaching is not just theory. Theory has no use if there is no practical use.

It is better to understand single verse and put on practice than all those categories.

There is no different categories for SADDHA. This is confirm confidence in Buddha.
SN 48.9 wrote:And what is the faculty of faith?
Katamañca, bhikkhave, saddhindriyaṁ?

It’s when a noble disciple has faith in the Realized One’s awakening:
Idha, bhikkhave, ariyasāvako saddho hoti, saddahati tathāgatassa bodhiṁ:

‘That Blessed One is perfected, a fully awakened Buddha, accomplished in knowledge and conduct, holy, knower of the world, supreme guide for those who wish to train, teacher of gods and humans, awakened one, blessed.’
‘itipi so bhagavā arahaṁ sammāsambuddho vijjācaraṇasampanno sugato lokavidū anuttaro purisadammasārathi satthā devamanussānaṁ buddho bhagavā’ti—

This is called the faculty of faith.
Also, As Buddha said in MN 95. No baseless faith.
MN 95 wrote:This being so, doesn’t the brahmins’ faith turn out to be baseless?”
nanu evaṁ sante brāhmaṇānaṁ amūlikā saddhā sampajjatī”ti?

“The brahmins don’t just honor this because of faith, but also because of oral transmission.”
Next time, please quote Sutta about SADDHA.
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by robertk »

Joe.c wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 1:38 am
robertk wrote: Sat Jan 28, 2023 5:51 am You could also add this:
The Expositor p.37
He who prohibits (the teaching of) Abhidhamma gives a blow to the Wheel of the Conqueror, denies omniscience, subverts the Teacher’s knowledge full of confidence, deceives the audience, obstructs the path of the Ariyas, manifests himself as advocating one’ of the eighteen causes of dissension in the Order, is capable of doing acts for which the doer is liable to be ex- communicated, or admonished,’ Or scorned (by the Order), and should be dismissed after the particular act of excommunication, admonition, or scorn, and reduced to living on scraps of food.
I wonder who wrote/said this, definitely not Buddha. Have you checked where this being is going? Lower realm maybe.

Even Buddha never have any strict rule about this.

The teaching is free and any wise person can understood. No blindly belief ever.

Truly someone who hasn't understood write and propagate this. Becareful.
The Expositor (pali-Atthasālinī ) was by Buddhaghosa and is the Commentary on the Dhammasangani.
I didn't check where he is going, but I doubt it is the lower realm.
Scabrella
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2023 4:59 am

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Scabrella »

Joe.c wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 1:56 am A stream enterer has 4 factor of stream enterer:
SN 55.5 wrote:associating with good people, listening to the true teaching, focus attention to the source, and practicing in line with the teaching
Thank you. This does not sound special.
Joe.c wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 1:56 amFor stream enterer fruit:
SN 55 wrote:Unshakeable confidence with Buddha, Dhamma and ariya sangha. Have perfected precepts that lead to samadhi.
Thank you. This does not sound special. Confidence & faith. Many people have over-estimated misguided faith & confidence. What about emptiness & these types of transcendent states of mind Buddhists talk about? Does a stream-enterer have no experience of emptiness & ego-dissolution?
justindesilva
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by justindesilva »

Joe.c wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 3:41 am [quote=justindesilva post_id=712246 time=1674960968 user_id=

This is called the faculty of faith.
Also, As Buddha said in MN 95. No baseless faith.
MN 95 wrote:This being so, doesn’t the brahmins’ faith turn out to be baseless?”
nanu evaṁ sante brāhmaṇānaṁ amūlikā saddhā sampajjatī”ti?

“The brahmins don’t just honor this because of faith, but also because of oral transmission.”
Next time, please quote Sutta about SADDHA.
[/quote]

May I please indicate that I often get my knowledge in damma by listening to sermons and keep them in mind and hence quoting suttas may be difficult and time taking
I think what I have written on saddha is not wrong and if wrong anybodys criticism is welcome by reference . Very often I have been quoting sutra when necessary .
Joe.c
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Joe.c »

robertk wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:10 am The Expositor (pali-Atthasālinī ) was by Buddhaghosa and is the Commentary on the Dhammasangani.
I didn't check where he is going, but I doubt it is the lower realm.
Please check. Otherwise you will regret it later on.
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
Joe.c
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Joe.c »

Scabrella wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:28 am
Joe.c wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 1:56 am A stream enterer has 4 factor of stream enterer:
SN 55.5 wrote:associating with good people, listening to the true teaching, focus attention to the source, and practicing in line with the teaching
Thank you. This does not sound special.
I wouldn't be that fast to conclude. :)
you wrote:
Joe.c wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 1:56 amFor stream enterer fruit:
SN 55 wrote:Unshakeable confidence with Buddha, Dhamma and ariya sangha. Have perfected precepts that lead to samadhi.
Thank you. This does not sound special. Confidence & faith.
I wouldn't be that fast to conclude. To find a good person (Sapurissa), one needs to be good as well. :)

Most people like to theorize and make confusing statements. Never really practice. This teaching is to practice and realize even the single sentence in Sutta by following step by step of N8FP.
you wrote:What about emptiness & these types of transcendent states of mind Buddhists talk about? Does a stream-enterer have no experience of emptiness & ego-dissolution?
Don't worry about this. Just hear true dhamma and practice according to the true dhamma. That is more than enough for stream enterer.

These type of questions will die down by its own. It arise because someone said it and want to confused people. Waste of time to focus on it if one doesn't even know the answer.

Please ask back, HOW can they have transcendent states of mind? If they can't answer with N8FP. Just leave them alone. You are wasting your time there.

The teaching is about end of suffering and path that lead to end of suffering (N8FP). This is primary focus of the teaching (yoniso manasikara).
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Ontheway »

robertk wrote: Sat Jan 28, 2023 5:51 am You could also add this:
The Expositor p.37
He who prohibits (the teaching of) Abhidhamma gives a blow to the Wheel of the Conqueror, denies omniscience, subverts the Teacher’s knowledge full of confidence, deceives the audience, obstructs the path of the Ariyas, manifests himself as advocating one’ of the eighteen causes of dissension in the Order, is capable of doing acts for which the doer is liable to be ex- communicated, or admonished,’ Or scorned (by the Order), and should be dismissed after the particular act of excommunication, admonition, or scorn, and reduced to living on scraps of food.
This is a great point, robertk. Personally I have seen some monks teaching sermons yet without the knowledge of Abhidhamma, having difficulty in differentiating sammuti and paramattha.... And each of them contradicting one another with no consensus at all, and each of them claimed they knew better than the Theras in the past who relied on Pali Tipitaka and Atthakatha, by saying "....refering to the Nikayas" yet their understanding of the origin of Nikayas is so distorted. Another famous Malaysian Chinese monk named Dhammavuddho, while rejecting Abhidhamma & commentaries, introduced "soul" into Buddha's teachings. Some other even explained by adhering to modern scientific terms and gave no insight at all, mere jargons, and it even push even further away to the point of total confusion, though keep repeating the phrase "we follow Suttas". All these misguided people, can only verbally attack the great Theras in the past, not knowing that those Theras were actually Arahants (such as Ven. Moggaliputta Tissa Thera). As to why some layfollowers despise the great Theras in the past, I can only guess it is their jealousy, pride and foolishness. Much demerits has been accumulated by them. They can say whatever they want, as they preaching there is kammavipaka, yet the way they act is totally contradicting to what they say. Let see how they can endure the Vipakas.

What Bhaddantacariya Buddhaghosa Thera said is correct, those without Abhidhamma knowledge, that is, the ability to decipher the concepts of Sabhava, as well as both Sammuti and Paramattha, are not capable to give full exposition and analysis of the Dhamma, and hence couldn't differentiate between Dhamma and Adhamma in more detail ways, couldn't explain the meaning of Sassataditthi and Ucchedaditthi and they different from Anattavada of Lord Buddha in details. For the Lord Buddha, the Master is known as "Vibhajjavadi", the Analyser. And Abhidhamma is the best evidence to that name.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
User avatar
robertk
Posts: 5613
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by robertk »

Ontheway wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 11:31 am
robertk wrote: Sat Jan 28, 2023 5:51 am You could also add this:
The Expositor p.37
He who prohibits (the teaching of) Abhidhamma gives a blow to the Wheel of the Conqueror, denies omniscience, subverts the Teacher’s knowledge full of confidence, deceives the audience, obstructs the path of the Ariyas, manifests himself as advocating one’ of the eighteen causes of dissension in the Order, is capable of doing acts for which the doer is liable to be ex- communicated, or admonished,’ Or scorned (by the Order), and should be dismissed after the particular act of excommunication, admonition, or scorn, and reduced to living on scraps of food.
This is a great point, robertk. Personally I have seen some monks teaching sermons yet without the knowledge of Abhidhamma, having difficulty in differentiating sammuti and paramattha.... And each of them contradicting one another with no consensus at all, and each of them claimed they knew better than the Theras in the past who relied on Pali Tipitaka and Atthakatha, by saying "....refering to the Nikayas" yet their understanding of the origin of Nikayas is so distorted. Another famous Malaysian Chinese monk named Dhammavuddho, while rejecting Abhidhamma & commentaries, introduced "soul" into Buddha's teachings. Some other even explained by adhering to modern scientific terms and gave no insight at all, mere jargons, and it even push even further away to the point of total confusion, though keep repeating the phrase "we follow Suttas". All these misguided people, can only verbally attack the great Theras in the past, not knowing that those Theras were actually Arahants (such as Ven. Moggaliputta Tissa Thera). As to why some layfollowers despise the great Theras in the past, I can only guess it is their jealousy, pride and foolishness. Much demerits has been accumulated by them. They can say whatever they want, as they preaching there is kammavipaka, yet the way they act is totally contradicting to what they say. Let see how they can endure the Vipakas.

What Bhaddantacariya Buddhaghosa Thera said is correct, those without Abhidhamma knowledge, that is, the ability to decipher the concepts of Sabhava, as well as both Sammuti and Paramattha, are not capable to give full exposition and analysis of the Dhamma, and hence couldn't differentiate between Dhamma and Adhamma in more detail ways, couldn't explain the meaning of Sassataditthi and Ucchedaditthi and they different from Anattavada of Lord Buddha in details. For the Lord Buddha, the Master is known as "Vibhajjavadi", the Analyser. And Abhidhamma is the best evidence to that name.
:anjali: :namaste: :sage:
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Pulsar »

Sarathw wrote
The same way a monk with the state of association with desire and lust can be a householder too?
Good point My Dear Sarathw:
Can a monk who engages in money scams (stealing from the innocent householders), recent news of Sri lanka, (where originally Pali canon was written) be called a householder?
It would be unair to call such a monk, a householder, not every householder (as the term commonly is used) engages in thieving from the public.
With love :candle:
Last edited by Pulsar on Sun Jan 29, 2023 2:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Pulsar »

Mumfie wrote 
I'm sure Moggalliputtatissa was well apprised of the range of meanings and applications of gahaṭṭha, agārika, agāriya, gihi and gahapati.
Can you be sure?
I know little about the nuances implied in the variation of Pali. 
Recently during a chat on DW, I recall Bundokji pointed out that a highly respected Pali scholar (a monastic) translated Underlying tendency as "Obsession".
This tells me that Pali can be manipulated to read what the Kathavattu intended it to mean.
Set that aside,
let us return to the issue of Householder.
SN 22.3 refers to a sutta in Atthakavagga. The questions of Magandiya,
an excerpt:
"Having left home to roam without abode,
In the village the sage is intimate with none,
Rid of sensual pleasures, without expectations"
Dear Mumfie: How do you understand the phrase
  • "to roam without abode? "ie to be without a house, right?
Once you answer, I will bring another excerpt from the sutta,
to clarify what Ven Maha Kaccana intended by the word Householder?
He was responding to a question by Haliddakani,
a householder.
Perhaps Moggalliputtatissa was unaware of this particular sutta, or chose to ignore it, in order to prove his point. 
In this very discussion you showed us that he ignored the fact that Yasa, a layman had become an Arahant, pointed out by his opponent. He insisted that a layman cannot become an arahant,
that a robe is a must, for the Arahant.
In the not so far back history of Sri lanka (where Pali canon originated), a robed monk assassinated the democratically appointed leader of that country? 
Let us consider the profound meaning of the word "Householder" (the one that leads to Nibbana). Must we not stick with the definition of SN 22.3? VBB identified SN as closest to the Buddha, compared to other Nikayas.
There is a conventional meaning and a supramundane meaning to many words used by the Buddha.
My point in bringing this up, is to show that many monastics, could be householders.
Whereas, some householders who understand the doctrine as Buddha taught it, and follow SN 22.3, may not be holding on to houses, at those times, when they are engaged in the Noble practice taught by the Founder.
Your thoughts?
With love  :candle:
User avatar
Mumfie
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2022 4:43 pm

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Mumfie »

Pulsar wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 1:42 pm In this very discussion you showed us that he ignored the fact that Yasa, a layman had become an Arahant, pointed out by his opponent. He insisted that a layman cannot become an arahant,
that a robe is a must, for the Arahant.
That's not so.

In fact the Theravādin and the Uttarapāthaka agree:

1. That a layman can attain arahantship.

2. That nobody can attain arahantship without abandoning desire-&-lust.

The cause of their debate is that both sides are labouring under a misapprehension regarding the other's view.

When the Uttarapāthaka says that arahantship can be attained without abandoning gihisaṃyojana, the Theravādin thinks he's claiming that it can be attained without abandoning desire and lust.

And when the Theravādin says that arahantship cannot be attained without abandoning gihisaṃyojana, the Uttarapāthaka thinks he's claiming that it cannot be attained without abandoning the household life and becoming a monk.

And so the two parties are arguing at cross purposes and it's the Uttarapāthakas who are to blame for this, for they are the ones using the term gihisaṃyojana in an innovative way, i.e., to mean the mere fact of being still a white-clothed home-owner.
“Hobgoblin, nor foul fiend,
Shall daunt his spirit;”
John Bunyan, Pilgrim’s Progress II)
Pulsar
Posts: 2641
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 pm

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Pulsar »

Mumfie wrote
In fact the Theravādin and the Uttarapāthaka agree:
1. That a layman can attain arahantship.
Thanks for the clarification, these disputes confuse me due to the wording. Words can confuse when
used out of context, such as the word
  • Householder
I always wondered why a robe was essential to gain liberation from Samsara. Nowhere in the sequence of Paticca samuppda or the 4 Noble Truths, does the Buddha say, "to understand, the foundation of Buddhism one requires a robe"
Mumfie wrote
And so the two parties are arguing at cross purposes and it's the Uttarapāthakas who are to blame for this, for they are the ones using the term gihisaṃyojana in an innovative way, i.e., to mean the mere fact of being still a white-clothed home-owner.
I can think of many innovations by Vibajjavadins elsewhere, but this thread is about disputes found in Kathavatthu. I am glad you brought these up with clarity.
The only other person who was able to engage in this kind of productive discussion in relation to Kathavatthu was DooDoot, if I remember right. I miss him.
With love :candle:
Joe.c
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Joe.c »

justindesilva wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:40 am May I please indicate that I often get my knowledge in damma by listening to sermons and keep them in mind and hence quoting suttas may be difficult and time taking
I think what I have written on saddha is not wrong and if wrong anybodys criticism is welcome by reference . Very often I have been quoting sutra when necessary .
Problem is Buddha never said about akarawathi saddha. There is only 1 saddha in Buddha's teaching.

Also when a monk quote or mentioned something. It is our job to do the check and balance. Did Buddha say it or not in Sutta? Otherwise you might be lead to wrong path easily.

It is better to KEEP remember 1 verse and practice according to the verse day and night, Then remember all categories which has NO USE at all.
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
Joe.c
Posts: 1484
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2021 5:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by Joe.c »

Funny, I tried to recall what Buddha would say about one who say adhamma as dhamma. Here is what come up:
AN 10.37 wrote:“Ānanda, it’s:

1. when a mendicant explains what is not the teaching as the teaching,
2. and what is the teaching as not the teaching.
3. They explain what is not the training as the training,
4. and what is the training as not the training.
5. They explain what was not spoken and stated by the Realized One as spoken and stated by the Realized One,
6. and what was spoken and stated by the Realized One as not spoken and stated by the Realized One.
7. They explain what was not practiced by the Realized One as practiced by the Realized One,
8. and what was practiced by the Realized One as not practiced by the Realized One.
9. They explain what was not prescribed by the Realized One as prescribed by the Realized One,
10. and what was prescribed by the Realized One as not prescribed by the Realized One.

On these ten grounds they split off and go their own way. They perform legal acts autonomously and recite the monastic code autonomously. That is how schism in the Saṅgha is defined.”

“But sir, what does someone who has split a harmonious Saṅgha bring upon themselves?”

“They bring upon themselves evil that lasts for an eon.”

“But sir, what is the evil that lasts for an eon?”

“They burn in hell for an eon, Ānanda.
and on DN 33 to recite in harmoniously:
DN 33 wrote:But this teaching is well explained and well propounded to us by the Blessed One, emancipating, leading to peace, proclaimed by someone who is a fully awakened Buddha.

You should all recite this in concert, without disputing, so that this spiritual path may last for a long time.

That would be for the welfare and happiness of the people, out of compassion for the world, for the benefit, welfare, and happiness of gods and humans.

And what is that teaching?

1. Ones ...
Funny things is someone above has a great respect to Sakka DevaRaja and Vessavaṇa. I'm wondering what they think about Abhidhamma vs Sutta.
May you be relax, happy, comfortable and free of dukkhas from hearing true dhamma.
May you gain unshakable confidence in Buddha, Dhamma and (Ariya) Sangha.
Learn about Buddha/Dhamma Characters.
justindesilva
Posts: 2602
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:38 pm

Re: A tentative Theravada taxonomy of "heresy"

Post by justindesilva »

Joe.c wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 11:20 pm
justindesilva wrote: Sun Jan 29, 2023 4:40 am May I please indicate that I often get my knowledge in damma by listening to sermons and keep them in mind and hence quoting suttas may be difficult and time taking
I think what I have written on saddha is not wrong and if wrong anybodys criticism is welcome by reference . Very often I have been quoting sutra when necessary .
Problem is Buddha never said about akarawathi saddha. There is only 1 saddha in Buddha's teaching.

Also when a monk quote or mentioned something. It is our job to do the check and balance. Did Buddha say it or not in Sutta? Otherwise you might be lead to wrong path easily.

It is better to KEEP remember 1 verse and practice according to the verse day and night, Then remember all categories which has NO USE at all.
Thank you for the advise . But it is not necessary to check damma sermoned by learned bikkus . Still on checking akarawati sadda , came across an article by one Dr Ari Ubeysakara on saddha which mentioned akarawathi sadda as investigative faith mentioning Vakkkali sutta as an example .
Amulika saddha is mentioned as rootless faith , We investigate damma and follow it for our own salvation and share it for others benefit too .
Post Reply