DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**JulieSmithXIV** · 10-26-2011, 07:23 PM

review of "A Concise History of Buddhism" from Amazon.com:

By
Eric Van Horn (Colchester, VT United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: A Concise History of Buddhism (Hardcover)
I have a great respect for books, and I have at least as much respect for the Buddha Dharma, so it shocks even me to say that in my entire life I have only thrown away one book - and I mean into the trash - and this is it. One of the dark aspects of Buddhism is the pejorative way in which the Mahayanna traditions of Buddhism - Zen and Tibetan Buddhism - treat their Theravadan brothers. This book is full of just such treatment. For example, at one point in the book, the author states that one school of Theravadan Buddhism emphasized the four "Brahma Viharas" (the "noble qualities" of loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity), even though - as he puts it - "there is no canonical evidence to support such a practice." This is simply not true. The Pali Sutthas are full of discourses on the Brahma Viharas. At one point they state that in a previous lifetime, the Buddha "became one with Brahma" by practicing the Brahma Viharas. This is just one modest example of the completely misleading way in which this book is written, and it doesn't begin to capture the negative tone it has toward Theravadan Buddhism. If you want to learn Buddhist history, do not read this book. It will give you a completely misguided impression of what that history really is. It is primarily Mahayana propaganda.

Yeah... Hardly. As other Amazon.com readers have pointed out, Eric Van Horn misquotes and misrepresents Skilton's work.

Here is what Skilton actually wrote about the Brahma Viharas:

"The Theravadin School developed a rather austere orthodoxy, epitomized in the works of the 5th century scholastic Buddhagohosa, especially in his Visuddhi-magga, which on a theoretical level tends to exclude doctrines and practices incompatible with its preferred preoccupations. An example of this exclusion might be the meditational practices called the brahma-viharas, which in its Abhidamma and commentarial literature are relegated to an ancillary function only, whereas its own canon records instances which substantially refute this role. Canonical passages frequently contain editorial additions "demoting" the brahma-viharas but, where parallel texts survive from the Mahasanghika canon, it is interesting to note that the latter did not feel any need to qualify such practices in that way."

Also, Skilton is not (or was not, at the time the book was published) a Mahayana Buddhist -- he was until recently part of FWBO/Triratna, which is ecumenical in its approach.

10-26-2011, 07:23 PM	#19
JulieSmithXIV Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 529 Senior Member	review of "A Concise History of Buddhism" from Amazon.com: By Eric Van Horn (Colchester, VT United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME) This review is from: A Concise History of Buddhism (Hardcover) I have a great respect for books, and I have at least as much respect for the Buddha Dharma, so it shocks even me to say that in my entire life I have only thrown away one book - and I mean into the trash - and this is it. One of the dark aspects of Buddhism is the pejorative way in which the Mahayanna traditions of Buddhism - Zen and Tibetan Buddhism - treat their Theravadan brothers. This book is full of just such treatment. For example, at one point in the book, the author states that one school of Theravadan Buddhism emphasized the four "Brahma Viharas" (the "noble qualities" of loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity), even though - as he puts it - "there is no canonical evidence to support such a practice." This is simply not true. The Pali Sutthas are full of discourses on the Brahma Viharas. At one point they state that in a previous lifetime, the Buddha "became one with Brahma" by practicing the Brahma Viharas. This is just one modest example of the completely misleading way in which this book is written, and it doesn't begin to capture the negative tone it has toward Theravadan Buddhism. If you want to learn Buddhist history, do not read this book. It will give you a completely misguided impression of what that history really is. It is primarily Mahayana propaganda. Yeah... Hardly. As other Amazon.com readers have pointed out, Eric Van Horn misquotes and misrepresents Skilton's work. Here is what Skilton actually wrote about the Brahma Viharas: "The Theravadin School developed a rather austere orthodoxy, epitomized in the works of the 5th century scholastic Buddhagohosa, especially in his Visuddhi-magga, which on a theoretical level tends to exclude doctrines and practices incompatible with its preferred preoccupations. An example of this exclusion might be the meditational practices called the brahma-viharas, which in its Abhidamma and commentarial literature are relegated to an ancillary function only, whereas its own canon records instances which substantially refute this role. Canonical passages frequently contain editorial additions "demoting" the brahma-viharas but, where parallel texts survive from the Mahasanghika canon, it is interesting to note that the latter did not feel any need to qualify such practices in that way." Also, Skilton is not (or was not, at the time the book was published) a Mahayana Buddhist -- he was until recently part of FWBO/Triratna, which is ecumenical in its approach.
	Quote