The Wings Of Awakening

[chownah]

I've downloaded a copy of The Wings of Awakening by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. It is an analysis of the core teachings of the Buddha. It tells how the various concepts fit together into a multi-faceted system of teaching. It is quite specific in how it presents this organization. It makes sense to me and I want to embrace it whole heartedly but it occured to me that this interpretation of the Buddha's teachings might be biased and perhaps it contains a lot of opinion that is not accepted by Theravada Buddhists in general. I'd like anyone who knows about this work to let me know if this stuff is generally well accepted or if it is controversial or if I should be aware of any disclaimers that should go along with it or if there are any particular points that may be exagerated or etc.

Also, bina, do you have this one?

http://www.buddhanet.net/wingscon.htm

[sabaijai]

Based on a skimming of most of it online, and reading in full the two Basic Principles chapters, I'd say this work is well organised and well written. Seems like a very solid text to me, nothing out of the ordinary or unorthodox vis a vis Theravada teachings in general. I may have missed something of course.

That's not to say someone out there wouldn't find bones to pick, but that will be the case with every Buddhist teacher, anytime there's an attempt to explain the doctrine rather than simply quote the Tipitika. I find the explanations helpful and inspiring, personally.

I've read a fair amount of other material written by Ven Thanissaro, and have found him to be one of the most skilled of the Western teachers thus far published, in terms of Pali scholarship and transparent thinking.

All this with the caveat that I'm not sufficiently learned or wise myself to really pass judgement on a fellow of his qualifications and experience. But certainly Ven Thanissaro demonstrates an understanding of the Theravada tradition that is far beyond what any of us regular posters here on tv.com can claim.

It's a lot to read, good luck getting through it all.

[bina]

thanx chownah for thinking of me...

will down load as well

[bina]

checking out this thai site: http://www.dhammathai.org/buddhistdic/buddhistdictionary.php

i'm assuming its pali with thai translation??? anyone wanna try??

[Abandon]

Ajahn Thanissaro does make some slightly controversial assertions at times. But got to hand it to the guy ....

I think you (we) should use what makes sense to us the most. Lots of things I found useful years ago, I don't think about now. Other things were useless to me years ago, and then I rediscover them.

[sabaijai]

Ajahn Thanissaro does make some slightly controversial assertions at times. But got to hand it to the guy ....

I think you (we) should use what makes sense to us the most. Lots of things I found useful years ago, I don't think about now. Other things were useless to me years ago, and then I rediscover them.

So true, both points.

Know what you mean about Thanissaro. But there are certainly other teachers who have been more controversial in the past at least, e.g., Buddhadasa and even Aj Mun/Aj Fan/Aj Chah.

When it comes to Thai Theravada, the bhikkhu at Wat Bowonniwet (I forget his name, but he is very close to the Sangharaja) is probably the most orthodox farang monk I've ever met.

[Suthep_Steve]

The Wings Of Awakening, Is it controversial or not?

If it's not controversial is it actually worth bothering with?

If the greater body of the Buddhist community is leading its members to realisations and liberation as quickly as possible then perhaps we need to be non controversial. If not then enlightened teachers will appear controversial and will challenge our preconceived notions of what the Dharma is and what it is not.

I'm not talking about Theravada Buddhism particularly when I say that, and I have no intension to cause any offence. However if you are on a Vajrayana / Mahayana path you need a very controversial teacher.

In fact the old Tibetian Kadampa Geshes used to say if people don't think you are crazy you are doing something wrong.

[Abandon]

I rather liked the innocent 'thought for the day' thread, even though I never posted in it.

People certainly think I am crazy - so that means that I am doing something right?

Steve makes a good point. I have always felt a bit cheated by every teachers ideas about Dependant Origination .. good dhamma, but not really covering the topic satisfactorily.

Are we Buddhists the blind leading the blind?

Have we got things mixed up?

Is that why there are not many arahants?

Or are there arahants, but not in the Buddhist tradition?

Why does it seem as if so many were getting enlightened back in the Buddha's day, and not now? Are things/people really so different now?

[chownah]

Is 'dependent origination' the same as 'dependent co-arising'? If so then you might want to check out Wings of Awakening....the thing I like about it is that it explains how all the conepts fit together. For example, in this link: http://www.buddhanet.net/wings_1a.htm The main focus is 'skillfullness' and how it is perhaps THE basic idea that generated all of what Buddha learned....and in the discussion it talks about dependent co-arising and how the concept comes logically from the concept of skillfullness.

There are alot of terms that I don't understand clearly and 'dependent co-arising' is just one of them. Wings of Awakening does a good job of explaining what these things are and how they fit together...at least they do a good job so that I feel like I understand them after studying this text.

[Abandon]

Dependant origination, dependent genesis, dependent co-arising, wheel of becoming .... etc are all the same teaching - translations of paticca samuppada.

I'll look through wings as I can, but will be going to Bkk in Dec, and CM in Jan, and after that I don't know....

[JoySword]

Ajahn Thanissaro (a/k/a Tahn Geoff) is quite conservative but I don't think controversial describes him properly. In the US there is not much Theravada buddhist practice among non-Asians. Most people practice according to a very westernized system that could more accurately be called Vipassana because they deal mostly with meditation and frequently leave the virtue (or discipline) and wisdom aspects of Dhamma to fend for themselves.

I have attended 3 or 4 programs led by him. He is a kind, learned man who is deeply devoted to teaching dhamma. He disagrees with a great many of the other Western teachers for various reasons. Some he believes are watering down the Dhamma to make it more palatable or marketable, others present teachings that have no foundation in the Pali Canon (the "source material" for Theravada Buddhism). I've also heard many of the teachers with whom he disagrees. They are sincere, dedicated practitioners who have spent a long time doing what they do. Yet when you hear Tahn Geoff, it's rather like getting a drink at a water fountain where the water splashes you in the face: you're a lot more awake afterwards.

Tahn Geoff is the abbot of Wat Metta near San Diego, California. You can read (and hear) more of his teachings at its website: www.mettaforest.org. He isn't reachable by e-mail but he does respond to snail mail whenever he can.

Cheers!