Posts
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- 2d
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- 2d
- Reply
- 8h
- Reply
- 2d
- Edited
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Reply
- 1d
- Edited
I’m sure we’ve all heard the standard Theravada view that only the early Buddhist Pali texts are legitimate teachings of the Buddha. Anyone here have an article or book they’d recommend on the dating of ancient Buddhists texts? Particularly any refutations of this common theravadin position. Thanks ATR!
16 comments
Peter Hong
I
think the notion that the Pali Canon has the monopoly of early buddhist
teachings has been debunked a long time ago but it has been propagated
for sectarian purposes. It is true that the Theravada tradition has the
most complete / well-preserved nikayas but they are
not necessarily the earliest or truest records of the original buddhist
teachings. Nowadays, scholars also use the various Chinese translations
of the Agamas (from Sarvastivadan, Dharmagupta and Mahasamghika
schools) to compare with the Pali Canon. Unfortunately, these Agamas are
not as complete and most of them no longer have the Sanksrit originals.
Peter Hong
Check out the work of Prof. Richard Solomon on early Ghandara manuscripts. Some articles of interest:
LIONSROAR.COM
How the Gandharan Manuscripts Change Buddhist History – Lions Roar
Peter Hong
If you like early buddhism, my favourite at the moment is by Roderick Bucknell https://www.amazon.com/Reconstructing-Early.../dp/1009236520
AMAZON.COM
Reconstructing Early Buddhism
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Imo wisdom is the criteria for my evaluation of the value of a text, not authorship.
Malcolm, 2017,
However,
clinging to the events described in the Lotus Sūtra, or any other
Mahāyāna Sūtra, opens up an uncomfortable can of worms for those who
literally believe in the text of the sūtra in question.
For example, have you ever seen Vulture's Peak where the Buddha is said to have taught this sūtra?
Image
Image
How
are 12,000 arhat bhikṣus supposed to fit there? Let alone, 2,000 extra,
6,000 nuns, and 80,000 bodhisattvas? Were they all levitating in space
around the mountain?”
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Malcolm,
2021: “Different paradigms for different occasions. Historically
speaking, it is unlikely Buddha taught Mahāyāna, let alone the tantras,
etc., was a kṣatriya, etc. But from the point of view of tradition, he
did all these things. I don't worry about the contradictions between these points of view.
Now we are really off topic.
“
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Malcolm, 2011:
“There
are many ways to claim a teaching of the Buddha's, and not all of them
require that Buddha actually spoke the teaching in question.
N”
Bill Callahan
Soh Wei Yu
Resonates like a temple bell. I think a with fundamental understanding
(seeing) of emptiness comes a growing capacity of discernment.
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Excepts from
Soh Wei Yu
Author
Admin
The
most important point though, is that the validity and importance of
Mahayana teachings does not depend on actual historicity.
There
is a text by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu received from dreams. It's called
The Cycle of Day and Night. It's a beautiful teaching. The Cycle of Day
and Night is an extraordinary upadesha on how to achieve the capacity of
total contemplation in one's life. Spontaneously written in 1983, it
was later discovered by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu to be based on a teaching
found in the Vai ro rgyud 'bum called The Upadesha of Vajrasattva which
had also been received in a dream by the author. The history of its
discovery and the two texts for comparison are presented in a book I
bought. They are very similar indeed.
So
whether a teaching is received in an alternate dimension in a pure
vision, or whether it took place historically, that doesn't matter at
all. The contents matter, its wisdom.
There
are other teachings received in dreams that were truly deep. I too had
received teachings from masters, Buddhas, bodhisattvas and dakinis that
were vital for my spiritual progress, and so has John Tan.
·
Reply
· 19m
·
Edited
Soh Wei Yu
Author
Admin
Another one, all about dream teachings received from Buddhas and bodhisattvas but very good and profound:
Buddhahood Without Meditation: A Visionary Account Known As Refining One's Perception Paperback – June 1, 2002
by Bdud-Joms-Glin-Pa (Author), Dudjom Lingpa (Author), Richard Barron (Author)
·
Reply
· 12m
·
Edited
Soh Wei Yu
Author
Admin
A clarification of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu's text:
After
writing down the teachings he received in dream vision, he subsequently
found a text found in the fifth or NGA volume of the Vairo Gyudhum
called 'A Concise Description of Remedies for (the Realization of)
Bodhicitta' ascribed to the supreme teacher Garab Dorje, and part of it,
bearing the title 'The Upadesha of Vajrasattva' seemed to be the same
as the text called 'The Upadesha of Shri Vajrasattva' which the great
Vidyadhara Dorje Yangwang Tsal had taught previously in his dream. So
from this he gained the special conviction that the text he had
spontaneously written was something authentic.
·
Reply
· 4m
·
Edited
AWAKENINGTOREALITY.COM
Yogacara vs Madhyamaka, Authorship of Mahayana Sutras
Mr. PP
Well
when one critically analyzes the suttas and agamas, one finds clearcut
stratification even within them. So it's likely that many parts of even
these texts do not contain much literal word-for-word quotes from the
Buddha (although probably some quotes are that
direct). Over reliance on text-critical methods alone for spiritual
practice is very weird. Early doesn't mean better. Personally though, I
find that the atthakavagga and parayanavagga (which are considered
early and have agama parallels so they are shared heritage of all
schools) have some of the most profound teachings. The directness and
clarity without making use of the later systematized constructs is quite
remarkable.
Mr./Ms. PZS
Mr. PP I agree, some of the earlier Pali material is so deep and beautiful
Soh Wei Yu
Admin
Author: Malcolm
Date: Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:28 pm
Title: Re: The Aro Authenticity Debate.
It is pretty simple there isn't the slightest bit of empirical evidence that from Mahāyāna onward
any of these texts, sūtra and tantras, long oral lineage or short treasure lineage, were indeed spoken
by the Buddha and so on.
Based upon this, I really think the standard of accepting and rejecting Buddhist teachings ought to be
based not upon their putative origin, but rather, whether or not they are well spoken.
If someone chooses to believe all the treasures we have received to date, for exam ple, are the words
of Padmasambhava, this is just fine. But it is a conscious choice for a Westerner not raised in Tibet in
the Nyingma and Kagyu traditions to believe this.
This also presents problems. Many tantras are not "well spoken" if taken literall y. But tantras that
might be considered mere manuals of sorcery and necromancy are rendered "well spoken" through
a process interpretive extraction of meaning.
Many treasures are very beautifully composed, and correspond well with the meaning of sūtra an d
tantra as we have them. Many sadhanas we have, in all schools are well spoken, beautiful
compositions, that correspond well to the interpretative pyrotechnics used to extract the meaningful
compositions, that correspond well to the interpretative pyrotechnics used to extract the meaningful
essence from the raw ore of the tantras.
My personal opinion is that Dzogchen tantras are among the most well spoken of Buddhist texts,
which is one of my main reasons for being enthusiastic about them, and which require almost no
need for hermeneutic strategies like the six limits and so on commonly employed to extra ct meaning
from tantras generally understood by western scholars to be composed in India.
When confronted with the things that people like Kim Katami say, or Majorie Quinn, and frankly,
many other people advertising themselves as teachers these days, thei r statements and theories
appear to me to very crude and not well stated, not in accord with what I personally understand to
be well spoken.
When confronted with novelties like Kalima as a yidam, it is very hard, as far as I am concerned, to
justify her i nclusion as yidam deity, as the basis of an authentic Buddhist path. So when Christy
McNally is bestowing Kāli empowerments, and Michael Roach is writing Jesus Sadhanas, I personally
think it is mistaken. But, obviously no one is listening to me. In the en d it is left to each of us to be
responsible for own path and practice.
Thus, the concern for proving the provenance of a lineage seems to be like chasing a willow wisp, it is
something always just out of grasp, and the force we use to try and catch it, j ust pushes it slightly
more beyond our reach.
In conclusion: the only proof anyone is able to offer for the validity of their own lineage is their own
faith in it; and the only proof of the invalidity of some other lineage is their lack of faith in it.
T his leads us, sadly, right back to the confusion of the Kalamas and the Buddha's reply:
It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is
doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired b y repeated hearing; nor upon
tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom;
nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor
upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas,
when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are
censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.
Mr. KOÖ
February Goodman Lecture | On Creating the Early Discourses (Suttas) of the Buddha
Speaker: Professor Eviatar Shulman, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
February Goodman Lecture | On Creating the Early Discourses (Suttas) of the Buddha Speaker: Professor Eviatar Shulman, Hebrew University of Jerusalem"What
are the early discourses attributed to the Buddha? We often think of
these texts as attempts to preserve the Buddha's teachings. While this
may be true to some extent, these scriptures are filled with creative
elements that show us that they are no less literary efforts, at times
even plain entertainment, filled with visionary materials that are meant
to move audiences and create aesthetic responses. Rather than trying to
tell us what the Buddha said, they offer a continuous investigation of
what he could have said, what the Dhamma actually means to a living
tradition, and how to cultivate love and respect for the great master.
In this talk, we will inquire into some of the motivations and methods
behind the shaping of the early discourses, in order to obtain an
improved understanding of the nature of the early Buddhist tradition."
YOUTUBE.COM
The Goodman Lectures: On Creating the Early Discourses (Suttas) of the Buddha
Peter Hong
Mr. KOÖ
I just had a quick search for the speaker. It seems that he is the
author of a couple of books on early buddhism. At the same time, I also
found that Bhikku Analayo had published a critical analysis of his
approach and interpretation: "the [method] does not
offer a reliable approach for a better understanding of the early
Buddhist texts. Whatever prima facie appeal it may have had, on closer
inspection the proposed model turns out to be based on a careless
reading of the primary sources and relevant scholarship, ...." At the
end of the day, we can get caught up with endless academic/scholarship
polemics on this topic and the best way to resolve them is as per Soh'
advice above - judge them based on whether they are "well-spoken" and
your own personal practice.
