[obegeLype]

There are many sutras, stories, and "teachings" which have been ascribed to the Buddha, or claimed to be "teachings of the Buddha", or to have been "derived" from the teachings of the Buddha, which fail the Four Great References the Buddha laid down to test whether a claimed teaching is authentic or not. Some of these are compounded or built upon other inauthentic stories or "teachings".

Shortly before his death, the Buddha laid down the "Four Great References" as a measure of how one could tell if a teaching was authentic or not, if it was uttered by the Buddha or not:

The Four Great References

7. And there the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Now, bhikkhus, I shall make known to you the four great references. [37] Listen and pay heed to my words." And those bhikkhus answered, saying:

"So be it, Lord."

8-11. Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief. Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.'

"In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve."

URL

This thread is for applying the Four Great References to teachings, stories, myths, stories, and claims that "The Buddha said thus-and-such".

[elton]

The Buddha did not teach:

"Abhidhamma"

"Three-Lives" paticcasamuppada (dependent co-arising or "origination")

sankhara as "kamma formations" (Nyanatiloka's contrivance -- see http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud...ict/dic3_s.htm )

"Tantra"

Any definition of "consciousness" that falls outside of the six forms of sense-experience awareness the Buddha describes, for example in MN 38

Example: Bhikkhu Bodhi's "stream of consciousness" that supposedly transmigrates form life-to-life is a re-work of Sati's heresy, for which the Buddha humiliated Sati in MN 38.

Any teachings or doctrines that are built upon, or expanded upon, any inauthentic teaching.

[Jeffery]

[BenBoobmers]

I must be missing something. All that I'm getting out of this is that "one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline" in regards to any teachings uttered by whomever. Well, who then is to say which Discourses and which Discipline are to be the gauge? I'm sure that there is another teaching that is better for determining whether a teaching leads to liberation or not, that contains specific characteristics of the teaching (i.e. "leads to dispassion, not to passion"), though I can't think of it off-hand. It's all about suffering and the cessation of suffering; that's the real gauge to go by.

[VFOVkZBj]

I can't see much point in bringing up a thread from 10 months ago to be quite honest, ....and Stuka hasn't posted here since last November.

[redDoodia]

I must be missing something. All that I'm getting out of this is that "one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline" in regards to any teachings uttered by whomever. Well, who then is to say which Discourses and which Discipline are to be the gauge? I'm sure that there is another teaching that is better for determining whether a teaching leads to liberation or not, that contains specific characteristics of the teaching (i.e. "leads to dispassion, not to passion"), though I can't think of it off-hand. It's all about suffering and the cessation of suffering; that's the real gauge to go by.

Good point. I hope it is enough to bring Stuka out of retirement from BWB, assuming he is still lurking about.

[XVzrlWIv]

I can't see much point in bringing up a thread from 10 months ago to be quite honest....and Stuka hasn't posted here since last November.

There wasn't any discussion about it then, and it is eminently worthy of discussion, I think ... with or without Stuka.

[Gasfghj]

carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it.

Hi

Personally, I have never read the Four Great References before.

To me, the "Discourses" here does not mean all discourses. Rather, it means the salient message in the majority of discourses.

For example, the Digha Nikaya contains the famed Maha-Nidana Sutta.

Some definitions in the Maha-Nidana Sutta, such as of consciousness, nama-rupa & the exclusion of the sense bases, do not match the definitions found in the other discourses on Dependent Origination and are exclusively found only in the Maha-Nidana Sutta.

It follows, imo, the famed Maha-Nidana Sutta is an example of one of those teachings that is subject to the scrutiny of the Four Great References.

Kind regards

[Rounteetepe]

Aha! I found the reference I was looking for, that trumps these "four great references" (weak references) by far:

Samkitta Sutta
A Brief Discourse to Gotami

Thus have I heard: At one time the Blessed One was staying at Vesālī, in the hall with the gabled roof in the Great Forest. Then Mahāpajāpatī Gotamī approached the Blessed One; paid homage, and stood on one side. Standing there she said to him: “It would be good, venerable sir, if the Blessed One would teach me Dhamma in brief so that, having heard the Dhamma from the Blessed One, I might dwell alone, secluded, heedful, ardent, and resolute.”

“Those things, Gotamī, regarding which you know, ‘These things lead to passion, not to dispassion; to bondage, not to liberation; to accumulation, not to relinquishment; to having many wishes, not to having few wishes; to discontent, not to contentment; to association, not to seclusion; to laziness, not to arousing energy; to being hard to support, not to being easy to support,’ definitely, Gotamī, you can decide, ‘This is not the Dhamma, this is not the Vinaya, this is not the Teacher’s instruction.’”

“Those things, Gotamī, regarding which you know, ‘These things lead to dispassion, not to passion; to liberation, not to bondage; to relinquishment, not to accumulation; to having few wishes, not to having many wishes; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to association; to arousing energy, not to laziness; to being easy to support, not to being hard to support,’ definitely, Gotamī, you can decide, ‘This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher’s instruction.’”

Samkitta Sutta,
Anguttaranikāya,
Atthakanipāta, A.iv.200

(underlines by yours truly, copied from http://www.aimwell.org/Books/Suttas/...samkhitta.html)

[orison]

Well spotted.