[oyymoss]

To Element,

From "Different forms of Buddhism" at Beginners Forum:

imo, if we are a very experienced practitioner, it is common to start with the Majjhima Nikaya and then the Samyutta Nikaya

however, if we are not & simply wish to explore, starting with the Anguttara Nikaya is best as this was compiled also for lay people

the Anguttara Nikaya has a large variety of topics taught in shorter discourses

kind regards

In this same sense, Element, what can you comment about the Digha Nikaya?

Thanks,

[Wavgbtif]

In this same sense, Element, what can you comment about the Digha Nikaya?

hi Esho

if asking for my personal comment, i would not recommend the DN

many a scholar, including Bhikkhus Buddhadasa & Sujato, have regarded portions of the DN as being composed after the Buddha's death and not the words of Buddha

from recollection, Sujato has commented the DN was composed for the purpose of converting Hindus to Buddhism, thus the strong anti-Brahmin material & propaganda, such as DN 11

imo, possibly, as a result, DN 11 and DN 15 have 'Brahmin' or 'Hindu' themes to entice Hindus, such as DN 11's "consciousness without feature" and DN 15's "consciousness entering into the womb", which many modern day Buddhists consider to be essential Buddhist teachings, but which actually conflict with the body of the suttas

DN 15 especially fails in its comformity with the scores of other suttas on the subject of Dependent Origination. thus, it appears impossible the Buddha actually spoken DN 15 (the Mahanidana Sutta)

Sujato has been critical of the Maha-satipatthana Sutta (DN 22), questioning its authenticity (see this link). Buddhadasa described the Maha-satipatthana Sutta as merely "a list" of dhammas [thus not spoken in any order, as the Buddha taught]

The 16 Steps is a straight-forward and clear practice, not just a list of names or dhammas like in the Mahasatipatthana Sutta (Digha-nikaya#22)

http://dhammatalks.net/Books3/Bhikkh..._Breathing.htm i recall Buddhadasa once commenting, verbally, he considered Buddha would not have spoken such long discourses

i personally agree with the above observations

although having not read all of the DN, i find the Sigalovada Sutta and the Maha-parinibbana Sutta to be of value and essential

kind regards

[Yifnvmzp]

Thanks a lot Element,

[Teareerah]

i just read the Potthapada Sutta (DN 9), which, typical to the DN, is a lot of debating & debunking (like an internet forum)

regards

Suppose they were to ask you: 'Did you exist in the past? Did you not not exist? Will you exist in the future? Will you not not exist? Do you exist now? Do you not not exist?' Thus asked, how would you answer?"

"... Thus asked, lord, I would answer: 'I existed in the past. I did not not exist. I will exist in the future. I will not not exist. I exist now. I do not not exist.'... That's how I would answer."

"Suppose, Citta, they were to ask you: 'Whatever your past acquisition of a self: Is that alone your true acquisition of self, while the future & present ones are null & void? Whatever your future acquisition of a self: Is that alone your true acquisition of a self, while the past & present ones are null & void? Whatever your present acquisition of a self: Is that alone your true acquisition of a self, while the past & future ones are null & void?' Thus asked, how would you answer?"

"...Thus asked, lord, I would answer: 'Whatever my past acquisition of a self: on that occasion, that alone was my true acquisition of a self, while future & present ones were null & void. Whatever my future acquisition of a self: on that occasion, that alone will be my true acquisition of a self, while the past & present ones will be null & void. Whatever my present acquisition of a self: on that occasion, that alone is my true acquisition of a self, while the past & future ones are null & void.