[Knillagrarp]

I hope I do not offend with my comments. The Suttas are accounts of the Lord Buddha's verbal teachings ( with all the nuances for dramatic effects which all speakers use to get the message across )rather than scholarly literary works - they were given to be used; actually put into practice rather than being studied and discussed.

I agree. Suttas are for practice, discussing and studying them however should occur. Are needed for deep comprehension and reflection. Not just as an intellectual exercise but much more in a contemplative way. Letting the sutta do its proper job within us.

Hope I am being clear enough here...

[MattJargin]

For me, the excerpt does not read well but a possibility that arises is "the breakthough" mentioned in the sutta can occur seven more times at most.

That is, there are seven more fetters for the stream winner to break.

Just an idea.

Mmm... the first three are overcome and are left seven...

The Pali Buddhist Dictionary by Ven. Nyanatiloka establishes a sequence for the overcoming of fetters and also tells that fetters are "lower" and "higher". Overcoming the first three is Sotapanna and then once the 4 o 5 lower fetters have been overcome it is called Sakadagami or the once returner to "sensuous world"; for the complete 5 lower fetters it is the Anagami or non-returner and the overcoming of the 10 fetters is the Arahat.

Sotapanna: Personality Believe, sceptical doubt, clinging to mere rules and ritual.

Once returner: Sotapanna + sensuous craving

Non returner: Once returner + ill will

Arahat: Non returner + craving for fine material existence, craving for immaterial existence, conceit, restlessness and ignorance.

Yes, seems reasonable that seven lifes are the rest of the fetters to be overcome even when through this last effort we have other stages as the Once Returner and the Non Returner.

From this: What means really "non returner"? Seems that the Non Returner has left lot of work to accomplish and reach the Arahat.

[Mynameishappy]

The words of the teachings were passed down and memorized by rote by folks who had vested interest in getting them right and nothing else to do. This isn't the game of chinese whispers you would like to make it out to be.

There are hints that the process didn't always go smoothly, though. The monk Purāna politely rejected the First Council's "approved version" of the teachings, saying that he preferred to go by what he himself had heard and learnt from the Buddha.

And that was right after the Buddha's paranibbana -- not to speak of centuries later when the suttas were actually written down!

Friend Purāna,” the elders said to him, “the Teaching and Discipline have been recited together by the elder monks. Please submit yourself to this recitation.”

“Friends,” he replied, “the Teaching and Discipline are well-recited by the elders. But in the way I have heard them in the Exalted One’s presence, in the way that I have received them in his presence, thus will I bear it in mind.

[agolutuaddiff]

Hi Lazy, do you have a source for the quote, please?

[wrardymar]

There are hints that the process didn't always go smoothly, though. The monk Purāna politely rejected the First Council's "approved version" of the teachings, saying that he preferred to go by what he himself had heard and learnt from the Buddha.

And that was right after the Buddha's paranibbana -- not to speak of centuries later when the suttas were actually written down!

There were others who misapprehended or misrepresented his teachings and dissented based on what they thought they heard even when he was alive. The core teachings, the teachings of liberation, were repeated over and over in the suttas. Revisionism just isn't going to work here.

[Bigroza]

In Richard Gombrich's 'What the Buddha Thought' he states that tradition says that the texts were formulated at the first council but that the term which is translated as 'council' really means 'communal recitation'. Also that the suttas were first recited in reply to Ananda's questioning. The Vinaya was recited by Upali and that when they both formulated the texts, the monks at the council rehearsed them and that was the beginning of the oral preservation of the Buddha's teachings.

[Sipewrio]

Hi Lazy, do you have a source for the quote, please?

It's in the Cullavagga. A discussion can be found here.

There were others who misapprehended or misrepesented his teachings and dissented based on what they thought they heard even when he was alive. The core teachings, the teachings of liberation, were repeated over and over in the suttas. Revisionism just isn't going to work here.

That may be so. But I haven't seen anything to suggest that this particular monk misapprehended the Buddha's teachings. He was consulted as a respected authority, a senior member of the community, and he declined to concur with the majority view. That's pretty much all that the records tell us, as far as I know.

And it doesn't appear to be some sort of revisionist campaign -- it's not like he said "Hell no, the Buddha taught eight noble truths and the doctrine of independent transmigration!". Probably it was over some question regarding the vinaya rules.

[WhiliaStelt]

It's in the Cullavagga. A discussion can be found here.

And it doesn't appear to be some sort of revisionist campaign -- it's not like he said "Hell no, the Buddha taught eight noble truths and the doctrine of independent transmigration!". Probably it was over some question regarding the vinaya rules.

The only thing your source claims about Purana's dissent had to do with the organization of the suttas:


Thereby Venerable Purāna rejected not only the organization of the Suttas into collections but, apparently, the structuring of the Suttas individually into the form in which they had been cast for transmission.

I happen to think that the Canon is poorly organized as well.


That is a far cry from your claim that he "rejected the teachings" themselves. It helps to actually read what you cite.



What is your source for this claim?:

He was consulted as a respected authority, a senior member of the community...

This does not appear to accord with your source's description of him:

A wandering monk, the leader of a large company, Venerable Purāna, while travelling through the Southern Hills south of Rājagaha, came to the cave

[frequensearules]

I agree. Suttas are for practice, discussing and studying them however should occur. Are needed for deep comprehension and reflection. Not just as an intellectual exercise but much more in a contemplative way. Letting the sutta do its proper job within us.

Hope I am being clear enough here...

Yes, whilst it takes scholars, translators and much experience to now be able to understand the Suttas in detail today, as FBM was saying at the time the language chosen was colloquial, Pali rather than Sanskrit and used expressions which meanings may be lost to us today without the help of scholars.

[Muhabsssa]

This does not appear to accord with your source's description of him:

A wandering monk, the leader of a large company, Venerable Purāna, while travelling through the Southern Hills south of Rājagaha, came to the cave

IIRC, in the Vinaya, monks are restricted on the number of lower-ranked monks they can lead by a) their ability to effectively instruct and b) by seniority, which is measured not in terms of skill, but by length of time in the community. I'd have to look it up again to be more precise, tho. There was also something about their ability to provide robes and other requisites.

[parishilton]

Yeah, you never say what you said. I get it.



I don't say what you think I am saying - you seem to want to think I differ to your dogmatic views and sometimes I do, sometimes I don't and mostly my comments aren't specifically one way or the other.



You are really hung up on this dogmatic mahayana antiintellectual-ism thing. Books are evil! Burn the books! The Buddha placed a great deal of emphasis on hearing the Dhamma correctly, learning it correctly, discussing it, and not misapprehending it.


Rather than anti -intellectualism, what I have been saying here is that at the time a person would not have needed to be an intellectual to hear, learn, discuss and practice the teachings which later became Suttas.



Nonsense. If you don't know what it is that you are practising and why, you are just spinning your wheels. More mahavajra dogmatism.

This is not what I said at all.



That doesn't really mean anything. What "teachers" have you found who were not "committed practitioners?


Many - informal teachers and also formal teachers.


But I note that you said "ALSO" this time, instead of "RATHER THAN". Still the same baseless dogmatic assertion. But again, you never say what you said.

The intention of giving the teachings, which later became Suttas was the information being used by anyone who had ears and the will, not to become the property of scholars. Today, in the West we need scholars to help us understand the nuances of language used. In reading the Sutta that Element started the thread with, without understanding the exact meanings, the picture created can still be understood, rather than misapprehended, if we contemplate.

But I note that you said "ALSO" this time, instead of "RATHER THAN". Still the same baseless dogmatic assertion. But again, you never say what you said. [/QUOTE]

[hLabXZlK]

IIRC, in the Vinaya, monks are restricted on the number of lower-ranked monks they can lead by a) their ability to effectively instruct and b) by seniority, which is measured not in terms of skill, but by length of time in the community. I'd have to look it up again to be more precise, tho. There was also something about their ability to provide robes and other requisites.

Right, but that doesn't put him on the level that LE is claiming:

He was consulted as a respected authority, a senior member of the community

It's not like we see this guy all over the Suttas like Ananda, Sariputta, etc.

[JimmyHas]

Originally Posted by stuka
Yeah, you never say what you said. I get it.

I don't say what you think I am saying You say one thing and they you claim you meant another.


- you seem to want to think I differ to your dogmatic views blah blah blah... It's about the Buddha's teachings, not "my dogmatic views". If they are dogmatic, then the Buddha was "dogmatic". So what? You are stuck in and push dogmatic mahavajra views and superstitions that have nothing to do with what the Buddha taught.



You are really hung up on this dogmatic mahayana antiintellectual-ism thing. Books are evil! Burn the books! The Buddha placed a great deal of emphasis on hearing the Dhamma correctly, learning it correctly, discussing it, and not misapprehending it.
Rather than anti -intellectualism, what I have been saying here is that at the time a person would not have needed to be an intellectual to hear, learn, discuss and practice the teachings which later became Suttas. This has nothing to so with "being an intellectual". One can't practice what one doesn't know and understand.

Nonsense. If you don't know what it is that you are practising and why, you are just spinning your wheels. More mahavajra dogmatism. This is not what I said at all. Yeah, you said folks don't need to study or discuss the suttas.


That doesn't really mean anything. What "teachers" have you found who were not "committed practitioners?
Many - informal teachers and also formal teachers. Who?

But I note that you said "ALSO" this time, instead of "RATHER THAN". Still the same baseless dogmatic assertion. But again, you never say what you said. The intention of giving the teachings, which later became Suttas was the information being used by anyone who had ears and the will, not to become the property of scholars. Straw Man -- No one has said anything about "becoming the property of scholars". And yes, the Suttas were intended for anyone who had ears and the will. To study AND discuss AND learn AND comprehend AND verify AND put into practice. Mahavajyra revisionist making up as you go along is not what the Buddha had in mind.

Today, in the West we need scholars to help us understand the nuances of language used. In reading the Sutta that Element started the thread with, without understanding the exact meanings, the picture created can still be understood, rather than misapprehended, if we contemplate. Unfortunately, some of those very scholars -- such as Bodhi -- are misrepresenting what the Buddha said and taught.

[lmHVYs8e]

It's not like we see this guy all over the Suttas like Ananda, Sariputta, etc.

No, not on that level of course. Nevertheless, he seems to be a monk of some distinction -- according to the sutta, he shows up at the Council with 500 bhikkhus.

The Cullavagga doesn't provide any specifics about the Venerable's objections, so we can't conclude they necessarily had to do with how the scriptures were organized (he actually says the recitation was "well sung"). We don't really know anything beyond the fact that he withheld his full endorsement, for whatever reason.

I think there are later texts which recount the episode in more detail, though who knows how authentic they are.

[UrUROFlS]

No, not on that level of course. Nevertheless, he seems to be a monk of some distinction -- according to the sutta, he shows up at the Council with 500 bhikkhus.

Which isn't that many, considering.


The Cullavagga doesn't provide any specifics about the Venerable's objections, so we can't conclude they necessarily had to do with how the scriptures were organized (he actually says the recitation was "well sung"). We don't really know anything beyond the fact that he withheld his full endorsement, for whatever reason. Then why did you claim it was over the teachings?

[OvDojQXN]

The Cullavagga doesn't provide any specifics about the Venerable's objections...

Exactly.

The text simply states:
'The Dhamma and the Vinaya, friend Purâna, have been chanted over together by the Thera Bhikkhus. Do thou, then, submit thyself to and learn the text so rehearsed by them.'

'The Dhamma and the Vinaya, Sirs, have been well sung by the Theras. Nevertheless, even in such manner as it has been heard by me, and received by me from the very mouth of the Blessed One, in that manner will I bear it in my memory.' This does not mean the essence of the Dhamma is different.

The Buddha taught in many ways, such as in brief, at length, in verse (poetry), in lists, etc, etc

The essence of Buddha-Dhamma is one and what Purâna would have objected to could not be related to the essence of the Buddha-Dhamma.

Regards

[Rememavotscam]

You say one thing and they you claim you meant another.


I would be interested to hear if others see it the same way.

I have not said anything different - maybe I do not explain myself well and as you see me in a certain way you assume I mean certain things and others here are more tolerant of me and interested in understanding what I am trying too say.




It's about the Buddha's teachings, not "my dogmatic views". If they are dogmatic, then the Buddha was "dogmatic". So what? You are stuck in and push dogmatic mahavajra views and superstitions that have nothing to do with what the Buddha taught.

I am not stuck anyway - however many times you push me into a box and try to keep me there in your perception, stuka.





This has nothing to so with "being an intellectual". One can't practice what one doesn't know and understand.

All I have said here is that the teachings were and are to given with the intention of being for practice - I did not say they should not be studied at all.



Yeah, you said folks don't need to study or discuss the suttas.

I did not say this - I said they were not given to be studied and discussed, they were given to be used.




Who?

Individuals who are in a teaching role and in my interactions with them know the teachings and do not practice them in their actions.



Straw Man -- No one has said anything about "becoming the property of scholars". And yes, the Suttas were intended for anyone who had ears and the will. To study AND discuss AND learn AND comprehend AND verify AND put into practice. Mahavajyra revisionist making up as you go along is not what the Buddha had in mind.

I said that is not what the teachings were given for and agree you can not practice something you do not understand.


Unfortunately, some of those very scholars -- such as Bodhi -- are misrepresenting what the Buddha said and taught.

I see that you could be seen as misrepresenting the intention of the Pali canon being collated, but as it is up to all of us to discern what is truth, what you say or what I say is not that important, how we practice what we understand is the important thing, unfortunately discussing this topic with you is getting like most discussions with you for me and I will end it here.

Message to admin - I am having lots of difficulties posting today. Keep getting pop up stating that I can't post as the post is too few letters when this is not the case.I am hoping this addition will allow me to post my comment above - hence my writing it here.

[NumDusthouh]

Message to admin - I am having lots of difficulties posting today. Keep getting pop up stating that I can't post as the post is too few letters when this is not the case.I am hoping this addition will allow me to post my comment above - hence my writing it here. Hi Andy,you need to PM or e-mail Woodscooter or ask him for help in the Technical Help forum.

Lets all continue with kind exchanges between the posters on the actual subject of this interesting discussion itself, rather than getting into personal comments about each other, thanks.

I found this :

"The newcomer proudly introduced himself as a stream-enterer (the first stage of Enlightenment in which one is free from the first three of the 10 fetters that bind one to the sensuous world).

After replying “In the village I’m from, stream-enterer is another word for a mangy dog,” Ajahn Chah watched the new arrival stomp off in anger. “Well, so much for stream-entry,” he commented in so many words.

The lesson is that when one is open to listening, spiritual friendship, along with careful self-examination are the most useful guides for assessing one’s spiritual state."

http://www.abhayagiri.org/main/article/1878/

[aabbaDE]

Love it .... mangy dog !! Thanks Aloka- D.

[Anatolii]

From this: What means really "non returner"? Seems that the Non Returner has left lot of work to accomplish and reach the Arahat.

hi Kaarine

personally, I am not sure, and can only speculate

in the description of the stream of Anapanasati (Mindfulness With Breathing), the meditator ends the five hindrances, experiences some factors of jhana (rapture and happiness), and then enters into the 9th stage of experiencing the defiled mind, before their mind is liberated from defilement & one-pointed concentration in the 12th stage. then their mind progresses onto the pure vipassana (insight) of the 13th to 16th stages

so i can only assume the 'once-returner' is yet to experience the equivalent of the 9th stage where as the 'non-returner' has passed through it

the Buddha often equated the word 'world' (loka) with defilement (kilesa)

so, offering a here-&-now explanation, i can only guess the 'non returner' never again returns to the 'world' of the 4th and 5th fetters, namely, sensual desire and ill-will

kind regards

element

42. "Monks, this Teaching so well proclaimed by me, is plain, open, explicit, free of patchwork. In this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork; for those who are arahants, free of taints, who have accomplished and completed their task, have laid down the burden, achieved their aim, severed the fetters binding to existence, who are liberated by full knowledge, there is no round of existence that can be ascribed to them.

43. "Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork, those monks who have abandoned the five lower fetters will all be born spontaneously (opapātika) and there they will pass away finally, no more returning from that world.

44. "Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork, those monks who have abandoned three fetters and have reduced greed, hatred and delusion, are all once-returners, and, returning only once to this world, will then make an end of suffering.

45. "Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork, those monks who have abandoned three fetters, are all stream-enterers, no more liable to downfall, assured, and headed for full Enlightenment.

46. "Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit, and free of patchwork, those monks who are mature in Dhamma, mature in faith, are all headed for full Enlightenment.

47. "Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork, those who have simply faith in me, simply love for me, are all destined for heaven."

48. This said the Blessed One. Satisfied, the monks rejoiced in the words of the Blessed One.

Alagaddupama Sutta: The Snake Simile

opapātika: Opapātika (adj.) [fr. upapatti; the BSk. form is a curious distortion of the P. form, viz. aupapāduka Av. Ś ii.89; Divy 300, 627, 649] arisen or reborn without visible cause