DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Debating origins of Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism

**katespepach** · 08-27-2010, 04:55 AM

A few probably very ignorant questions........

Do you really want to go down that road again, jan?

Once again, the suttas have been passed on by recitation and repetition, much like a modern musician can memorize thousands of songs, melody, lyrics, and all, without error, by persons who have a vested interest in their accuracy and nothing better to do.

AND, supposing that there was no Buddha, and these teachings were made up by some beneficial group of monks. So what we have left is a group of "Noble" teachings that are practical, internally consistent, timeless, applicable to everyone, beneficial for anyone and everyone regardless of time, place, culture, etc -- and on the other hand we have a bunch of contradictory superstitions that are based upon supposition and not a shred of evidence. Easy choice here.

This is not the first time this has been explained to you, jan. Let us please make it the last.

The suttas with all there repetition, it is often argued, were especially designed for easy memorisation, and are therefore, likely to be at least different in that respect to the Buddha's literal words during sermons.

Except for that pesky little bit about the Buddha having uttered them, and that he was the one who devised and spoke them in a way designed for them to be easily remembered.

08-27-2010, 04:55 AM	#17
katespepach Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 495 Senior Member	A few probably very ignorant questions........ Do you really want to go down that road again, jan? Once again, the suttas have been passed on by recitation and repetition, much like a modern musician can memorize thousands of songs, melody, lyrics, and all, without error, by persons who have a vested interest in their accuracy and nothing better to do. AND, supposing that there was no Buddha, and these teachings were made up by some beneficial group of monks. So what we have left is a group of "Noble" teachings that are practical, internally consistent, timeless, applicable to everyone, beneficial for anyone and everyone regardless of time, place, culture, etc -- and on the other hand we have a bunch of contradictory superstitions that are based upon supposition and not a shred of evidence. Easy choice here. This is not the first time this has been explained to you, jan. Let us please make it the last. The suttas with all there repetition, it is often argued, were especially designed for easy memorisation, and are therefore, likely to be at least different in that respect to the Buddha's literal words during sermons. Except for that pesky little bit about the Buddha having uttered them, and that he was the one who devised and spoke them in a way designed for them to be easily remembered.
	Quote