DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**fiettariaps** · 10-26-2011, 09:20 PM

Hardly. As other Amazon.com readers have pointed out, Eric Van Horn misquotes and misrepresents Skilton's work.

Five mahayanists putting up five stars. Yeah.

Here is what Skilton actually wrote about the Brahma Viharas:

"The Theravadin School developed a rather austere orthodoxy, epitomized in the works of the 5th century scholastic Buddhagohosa, especially in his Visuddhi-magga, which on a theoretical level tends to exclude doctrines and practices incompatible with its preferred preoccupations. An example of this exclusion might be the meditational practices called the brahma-viharas, which in its Abhidamma and commentarial literature are relegated to an ancillary function only, whereas its own canon records instances which substantially refute this role. Canonical passages frequently contain editorial additions "demoting" the brahma-viharas but, where parallel texts survive from the Mahasanghika canon, it is interesting to note that the latter did not feel any need to qualify such practices in that way."

Also, Skilton is not (or was not, at the time the book was published) a Mahayana Buddhist -- he was until recently part of FWBO/Triratna, which is ecumenical in its approach. Hardly evidence to your assertion.

10-26-2011, 09:20 PM	#22
fiettariaps Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 419 Senior Member	Hardly. As other Amazon.com readers have pointed out, Eric Van Horn misquotes and misrepresents Skilton's work. Five mahayanists putting up five stars. Yeah. Here is what Skilton actually wrote about the Brahma Viharas: "The Theravadin School developed a rather austere orthodoxy, epitomized in the works of the 5th century scholastic Buddhagohosa, especially in his Visuddhi-magga, which on a theoretical level tends to exclude doctrines and practices incompatible with its preferred preoccupations. An example of this exclusion might be the meditational practices called the brahma-viharas, which in its Abhidamma and commentarial literature are relegated to an ancillary function only, whereas its own canon records instances which substantially refute this role. Canonical passages frequently contain editorial additions "demoting" the brahma-viharas but, where parallel texts survive from the Mahasanghika canon, it is interesting to note that the latter did not feel any need to qualify such practices in that way." Also, Skilton is not (or was not, at the time the book was published) a Mahayana Buddhist -- he was until recently part of FWBO/Triratna, which is ecumenical in its approach. Hardly evidence to your assertion.
	Quote