[Henldyhl]

I have started a new topic here in the debating forum with Nirmal's post. It was moved from the Theravada-Mahayana thread in General Buddhist discussions.

[BrianGoldsmith]

Om Mani Padme Hom.

It is Buddhist tradition to believe the Truth and not who said it.Truth(not the person) is the most important.Supposing Nagarguna had established a religion with a teaching going further than the Buddha's preaching in the Hinayana(though now only the Theravadins of the Southern Buddhist traditions remain as an independent school), then we should believe Nagarjuna and not the Buddha, since the former taught the ultimate and complete truth

These comments doesn't make any sense to me at all, Nirmal.

All traditions calling themselves 'Buddhists' accept the truth of the Buddha's teachings otherwise by definition they cannot be called 'Buddhist'.

As far as Nagarjuna is concerned its even uncertain who he actually was:

http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/..._Nagarjuna.htm

and with personal investigation, we can see that the 'Mulamadhyamakakakarika' is based on suttas in the Pali Canon.

[Mappaindy]

A few probably very ignorant questions that are relevant for this discussion, and that some may be able to answer with evidence: did the Buddha write any suttas himself, or dictate them with a view and directions on how these should be made available and to whom, or was he aware, and to what extent, that his teaching were being recorded with a view of propagating these and did he ever comment on procedures that would best be followed in such a process? If so, were these directions about future propagation procedures followed up?

[Bondjrno]

A few probably very ignorant questions that are relevant for this discussion, and that some may be able to answer with evidence: did the Buddha write any suttas himself, or dictate them with a view and directions on how these should be made available and to whom, or was he aware, and to what extent, that his teaching were being recorded with a view of propagating these and did he ever comment on procedures that would best be followed in such a process? If so, were these directions about future propagation procedures followed up?

Hi Jan,

I definately don't mean to be rude to you, but somehow you don't seem to be able to step aside from your college- teacher mindset. You aren't in the situation now where you are providing essay questions for your students.

Why not do a little investigation yourself and then debate ? Zen people are called Zen Buddhists after all!

This is the debating forum for experienced practitioners not for Jan's question and answer sessions!

[MiniBoy]

Originally Posted by Aloka-D This is the debating forum for experienced practitioners not for Jan's question and answer sessions!

- lol .... Thanks. This was my understanding as well, an oral tradition, initially, although given so much weight to the Pali Canons gave me the impression that there was quicker righting up. So all answers to my questions seem to have to be answered negatively. 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.

Not all traditions, by the way, read suttas as part of there practice. And not all traditions necessarily meditate a lot throughout there practice. Some years ago, my teacher invited a monk in his early/mid twenties to our retreat. He had sponsored him from the age of eight. We were surprised, however, that the monk didn't know how to meditate. The training in northern India up to that point had consisted of Sutta recitation and memorisation only, not of meditation. So you see there are some interesting differences.

Metta


PS I hope I didn't ask these questions in a teacher type of way. I am not a Buddhist scholar, just a simple practitioner and I am under the impression that many people here have done a considerable amount of research from which I am benefitting.

[ovH9wfSJ]

So all answers to my questions seem to have to be answered negatively.

Not quite sure what you mean by this, but moving on now.....

The training in northern India up to that point had consisted of Sutta recitation and memorisation only, not of meditation. So you see there are some interesting differences.

This is certainly not the case with the Theravada Thai Forest Tradition which is very much a practice tradition here in the UK, and in various other countries as well as Thailand.

This is a video about the late Ajahn Chah, whom I would have loved to have met. I first became interested in the Forest tradition monks and their teachings after reading his essays.


Ajahn Chah - Mindful Way

[Tactattcahhaw]

Thanks Aloka-D. Great video! It's exactly the same

Interesting point though that also the Pali Canons are based on oral transmission, as is, arguably, also evident from their structure.

[Pznrrmaf]

Interesting point though that also the Pali Canons are based on oral transmission, as is, arguably, also evident from their structure.

Sure, before they were written down they were faithfully passed on by monks.

Why would that be inaccurate? I can recite 3 or 4 complete pujas (sadhanas) and various other chants in Tibetan without the texts, because I learned them by heart without even consciously trying - simply through regular repetition.

We can remember the lyrics of songs, recite poetry etc etc in the same way.

[KJnbceja]

Sure, before they were written down they were faithfully passed on by monks.

Why would that be inaccurate?

I am not saying it is inaccurate. But I think it is important to be aware of the possibility that the words have been rephrased (paraphrased), possibly not by the Buddha, for easy passing-on. I still need to read Confession of a Buddhist Atheist. Wonder whether anyone else already has, and whether this throws more light on the matter.

Metta

[Yyaqyped]

I still need to read Confession of a Buddhist Atheist. Wonder whether anyone else already has, and whether this throws more light on the matter.

As far as I know, Stephen Batchelor was originally a Tibetan Buddhist monk and translator....so he might not know too much about the Pali Canon.

[imnaone]

I think it is important to be aware of the possibility that the words have been rephrased (paraphrased), possibly not by the Buddha, for easy passing-on

From what you've said since you joined us Jan, I get the impression that you're not familiar with the suttas. Therefore might it not be more sensible, instead of making sweeping assumptions, to actually study them?

We used to have regular sutta studies in the Theravada forum before we changed the site software but we only moved 3 months of previous threads over here. Perhaps they should be started again and you could participate.

Stuka and/or Element might possibly be interested in re-starting them and I'm sure there would be some benefical exchanges.

[Brewpralgar]

Sure, before they were written down they were faithfully passed on by monks.

The Theravadans in Burma (and l think Sri Lanka) recite the whole of the Abhidhamma from memory,this is done in relays,when the monk in front of you wants to rest you take over,(the point here is that they don't have set pieces that they have memorised) so each monk needs to know the whole Abhidhamma.
I don't know how often this feat is carried out.

[PilotJargon]

So you see there are some interesting differences.

Yes, and fortunately such differences offer a wide scope for practice. In the tradition where I practice zazen is the core aspect of our understanding. We really hold in a few fundamental suttas but what is important for us is zazen and zazen brought into daily life.

[Yessaniloas]

but what is important for us is zazen and zazen brought into daily life.

I can appreciate this Kaarine, dear friend. My own practice very much involves the importance of "the here and now". However, without the teachings of the historical Buddha, the tradition from which it came would not have been in existence for me to receive those instructions.

[natahololll]

the tradition from which it came would not have been in existence for me to receive those instructions.

Yes, very ture Aloka, and this is why we hold our practice in the understanding and incessant actualization of the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path so not to be lost while we practice zazen...

[beneitpedro]

It is Buddhist tradition to believe the Truth and not who said it.

Actually, it is the Buddhist tradition to investigate phenomena. "Believing" the "Truth" is the domain of superstition.

Supposing Nagarguna had established a religion

Then it would be Nagarjuna-ism, rather than Buddhism.

going further than the Buddha's preaching in the [i]Hinayana[/h]

Please refrain from using that offensive word in this forum.

(though now only the Theravadins of the Southern Buddhist traditions remain as an independent school)

This is self-serving tibetan propaganda and untrue.

then we should believe Nagarjuna and not the Buddha, since the former taught the ultimate and complete truth

Good luck with your "Nagarjuna-ism". Rejecting the Buddha's teachings, however, what are you doing here?

In the Prajnaparamita Sutra

....which never crossed the Buddha's lips...

Our faith relies on truth and not on persons.
We believe in the truth itself but not in letter or word of scripture.
And in the ultimate but not in the incomplete truth.

...which makes it easy to make up as one goes along, ignoring the Buddha's teachings and creating a different religion. Which is fine, but it is kind of silly to claim that it is still "Buddhism".

Finally we lay stress on wisdom of realisation(prajna) and not on mere consciousness(vijnana) of the human mind.

Another tibetan-arrogant straw dog. The Buddha's teachings and the traditions that hold to them do not "lay stress on mere consciousness of the human mind".

In the Mahayana it is never said that the [edit: Theravada] is not Buddha-word,...

Wherein the mahayana admits its own eisegeses. But doesn't realize it because no one RTFM's.

It is said that the Buddha preached the Lesser as a foundation for the Greater Vehicle

A convenient self-serving lie used to introduce outside doctrines.

and this despite the fact that the Mahayana is already so complete

The Buddha proclaimed that his own teachings (the Nikayas) are complete and not in need of embellishments. But he also predicted that folks would ignore his teachings and push their own ideas as Buddhism:

SN 20.7: Ani Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....007.than.html

Staying at Savatthi. "Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained.

"In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited.

They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.

"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.



"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves."

[katespepach]

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.

[nryFBa9i]

Supposing Nagarguna had established a religion with a teaching going further than the Buddha's preaching... Dear Nirmal

If that was the case then the Buddha would not be "a Buddha" because a Buddha is by nature fully enlightened & instructs the Dhamma perfectly & completely.

What is true is confirmed via realisation. The Prajnaparamita Sutra instructs the sphere of nothingness, which is a temporary state.

It follows, in mistaking nothingness or 'no-thing' for emptiness (sunnata), the Prajnaparamita Sutra is an inaccurate expression of emptiness.

The Prajnaparamita Sutra is actually a step backwards because, before the Buddha gained enlightenment, he, as the Bodhisatta, rejected the sphere of nothingness as Nibbana.

The teachings of the Mahayana are largely devoid of proper understanding of vipassana & dispassion (viraga).

In Mahayana, vipassana is considered to be analytical reasoning, which is far from the reality of vipassana.

Also, the teachings of the Mahayana are also largely devoid of proper understanding of dependent origination and reduce dependent origination to a mundane teaching of inter-relatedness rather than a diagnostic explanation of the origin of suffering.

Best wishes

[Wheegiabe]

did the Buddha write any suttas himself, or dictate them with a view

Hi Jan

This kind of reasoning is not really relevant because the Buddha taught a "verification" tradition.

Each day in Theravada, practitioners chant the salient characteristics of the Dhamma, namely:

(LEADER):

Handa mayaṃ dhammābhithutiṃ karoma se:
Now let us give high praise to the Dhamma:

(ALL):

[Yo so svākkhāto] bhagavatā dhammo,
The Dhamma well-expounded by the Blessed One,

Sandiṭṭhiko akāliko ehipassiko,
to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting all to come & see,

Opanayiko paccattaṃ veditabbo viññūhi:
leading inward, to be seen by the wise for themselves:

Tam-ahaṃ dhammaṃ abhipūjayāmi,
Tam-ahaṃ dhammaṃ sirasā namāmi.
I worship most highly that Dhamma,
To that Dhamma I bow my head down.
(BOW DOWN) So my personal dispute with the Prajnaparamita Sutra is it describes a mental state that cannot be sustained. This is known clearly via experience, just as the Buddha-To-Be rejected the state of nothingness as Nibbana.

One cannot live life never perceiving or never describing "the eye", "the ear", "the mind", "form", "suffering", etc.

For example, if I am a doctor, how can I do my job if I do not discriminate or label certain objects as "eye", "eye" "throat", "liver", "heart", "gland", "neurosis", etc.

Also, how can I empathise with a patient who has emotional difficulties, by saying to them: "You are suffering" ?

I personally reject Prajnaparamita Sutra via experience rather than via allegiance.

In this world, in my experience, there is suffering, there is the cessation of suffering, there is the "eye", there is the cessation of the "eye".

The Buddha taught to be beyond "becoming" and "non-becoming", to be beyond "being" and "non-being".

Zen sutras, such as the Hsing Ming Ming also instruct to be beyond "being" and "non-being" but the Prajnaparamita Sutra appears to instruct only "non-being".


Kind regards

E

[nuabuncarnigo]

Zen sutras, such as the Hsing Ming Ming also instruct to be beyond "being" and "non-being"

True Element... that sutta leads our practice of zazen and is a core teaching for Soto tradition...