I Don't See Any Buddhism

[gregk0543]

There are some real monks out there but you have to make a little effort to find them.

 

I met Ajarn Char in 1980 and stayed in his monastery for a few weeks. That was fortunate for me and I can still reflect on his character and wisdom to inspire me.  But such people are rare so you have to make an effort. But they do exist.

 

There is a monk Ajarn Dtun who is his disciple who is equally impressive and of good character. Look him up on youtube.

He is still alive and doing well. There are others but you will find some impressive characters and people doing the right thing in Ajahn char monasteries.

 

www.watboonyawad.com

 

 

 

 

 

[VincentRJ]

On ‎4‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 7:09 PM, lekwanchai said:

I take the view that the teachings were passed down word for word by memorizing and chanting to ensure their accuracy, and since there were still many Arahants in those days they were involved and would never lie or distort because of their lack of ego, and the special abilities inherent in Arahanthood might ensure fine memory.

 

 

The issue is not necessarily about lying, but about the natural and understandable changes in interpretation that takes place over long periods of time.

 

I hesitate to undermine anyone's belief system, but the fact that we are no longer speaking the same dialect that the Buddha spoke 2,500 years ago, is very likely to be the cause of some distortion in our English understanding.

 

Rigorous rules regarding chanting practices, and continual monitoring to ensure mistakes are not made, might be effective and reliable for a certain period of time.

However, a major principle of Buddhism is that nothing is permanent. Change is unavoidable.

 

During the 4 to 5 hundred years of memorisation and chanting, prior to the writing of the Pali Canon, there was a gradual change in the spoken language. Pali is not the written script of the dialect spoken by Gautam Buddha. It might be similar, but it is not the same. Pali was not even a spoken language, but a literary language. It seems reasonable to me that lots of interpretations were made during the transformation from a spoken language to a written language.

 

Sorry to be so blunt. Contine to believe what you want. If no harm is done, no problem.

[IMA_FARANG]

Personally, I think it is possible to obtain 'enlightenment" or "clarity" in one lifetime for a normal sentient human being

But that is dependent one learning and understanding to free oneself of ones illuions and delusions to see clearly.

Of course, that second part may take a lifetime or more of effort to obtain, which is why it is so uncommon to find it.

For me, i am still working on it and the realization of the interconection beween one's percieved identity as an individual and  the illusion of the "self" and the "others" generated by the "Ego Mind" delusion of self.

In Zen that undestanding may be called "Pasing through the Gate of Self" and msy be considered a necessary step to "enlightenment" or "clarity of vision".

At 70 years of age, I may be running out of time in this life, but I'm not giving up yet.

All in all anyhow, it has been a good run for 70 years. all part of the great farce.

As Shakespere said, "That poor player that struts and frets his poor hour upon the stage, then is gone."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by IMA_FARANG

[camerata]

On 9/5/2016 at 5:12 PM, VincentRJ said:

 

The issue is not necessarily about lying, but about the natural and understandable changes in interpretation that takes place over long periods of time.

 

I hesitate to undermine anyone's belief system, but the fact that we are no longer speaking the same dialect that the Buddha spoke 2,500 years ago, is very likely to be the cause of some distortion in our English understanding.

 

Rigorous rules regarding chanting practices, and continual monitoring to ensure mistakes are not made, might be effective and reliable for a certain period of time.

However, a major principle of Buddhism is that nothing is permanent. Change is unavoidable.

 

During the 4 to 5 hundred years of memorisation and chanting, prior to the writing of the Pali Canon, there was a gradual change in the spoken language. Pali is not the written script of the dialect spoken by Gautam Buddha. It might be similar, but it is not the same. Pali was not even a spoken language, but a literary language. It seems reasonable to me that lots of interpretations were made during the transformation from a spoken language to a written language.

 

 

Pali is best described as a liturgical language, created to standardize the Buddha's teachings since he encouraged his monks to teach in their own various dialects. It was a spoken language, with no script of its own, and has therefore been written down in Sanskrit and other scripts - including Thai and Roman characters.

 

"Pali is closely related to the language spoken by the historical Buddha, and
there are hardly any indications of linguistic differences between the two
that might affect the meaning of the texts."

 

"...the differences in language between
Pali and the historically datable language of the Asokan pillars are no more
than minor phonetic changes that rarely, if ever, affect the meaning of the
content. In all probability a similarly close relationship obtains between
Pali and the historical Buddha’s own dialect."

 

"For several hundred years, from the time that separate transmission

lineages emerged in the Asokan period until the texts were written down, the
early Buddhist texts were passed down orally in separate textual lineages. Comparative
studies have shown that this oral transmission was highly reliable and that
the core doctrinal material was essentially unchanged. How did this work,
given what we know about the unreliability of memory? Indian culture
provided the template for highly reliable oral preservation. It is known
that the Ṛg Veda and other Vedic texts were transmitted orally - that is,
by memory - with extreme accuracy for over two thousand years."

 

There were in fact numerous techniques for ensuring the texts were transmitted accurately, including repetition and the standardization of words, phrases and passages.

 

See The Authenticity of the Early Buddhist Texts by Sujato and Brahmali.

 

 

[gregk0543]

Just having a read through this thread again and thinking about it. I have a few points I want you to consider.

 

Even amongst us reading the same written texts that havent changed in a good few thousand years we will understand them not in the same way.

There will be divergence of opinions and emphasis. We are each influenced by our own understanding and experience. We are mixing the same words in our minds but producing different results. We are playing the same instrument but making different tunes with it.

 

I can read pali. I have a copy of the tipitaka in my house. I have read it and translations for a long time now. It hasnt changed in 36 years since I first met it, but I have. I still question it. I still investigate. Ultimately I use my life as the gauge of what is correct. I have got a lot of guidance from these texts and I am still inspired by them. 

 

It still amazes me how little people actually try to practise what is said even though the instructions are pretty clear. Just simple ideas about 5 precepts sound too hard to most people. They wriggle like worms when you bring them up. Try telling your average Thai that the Buddha whom they respect advised you not to drink alcohol.  Try telling monks that the Buddha whom they respect advised them not to accept or use money. Try being honest in business pricing meetings with your clients and see how your business partners  react.  ( How often have I been told I know nothing about business and to shutup next time.)

 

Someone a long time ago, who was wiser than me, made an effort to put these teachings down in writing. They did a good job. The biggest problem here is probably with us not understanding it correctly rather than with them.

[VincentRJ]

Thanks for the link to the article by Bhikkhu Sujato & Bhikkhu Brahmali, Camerata. It will take me some time to read it all, but already I'm getting a sense of bias.

 

The following statement in the introduction seems a bit confused to me.  "However, it is overly sceptical and unscientific to conclude from the lack of such direct evidence that we cannot say anything, and that we cannot reach firm conclusions. Science works from indirect and inferred evidence, and the preponderance of such indirect evidence points to the authenticity of the EBTs."

 

I agree that it is overly sceptical and unscientific to conclude from the lack of evidence that we cannot say anything. However, to include, "and that we cannot reach firm conclusions" seems contradictory.

 

Science often addresses indirect and inferred evidence, but doesn't reach firm conclusions until direct evidence is found. That's the basis of the scientific method. A current example is the indirect and inferred evidence of the existence of Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Until we find or detect real examples of the stuff, we cannot reach any firm conclusions. It's possible that our current theories of astrophysics are simply wrong, or at least inaccurate on the massive scale of the universe.
 

[camerata]

Ultimately, what is important, IMO, is not whether the teachings are 100% verbatim but whether they are "fit for purpose" or not. In other words, "You have to put things to the test in your own thoughts, words, and deeds, to see what actually leads to suffering and what leads to its end."

[VincentRJ]

7 hours ago, camerata said:

Ultimately, what is important, IMO, is not whether the teachings are 100% verbatim but whether they are "fit for purpose" or not. In other words, "You have to put things to the test in your own thoughts, words, and deeds, to see what actually leads to suffering and what leads to its end."

 

Exactly! I agree completely. While it's interesting to speculate on certain possibilities, in the absence of firm evidence, such as the possibility that Lao Tzu travelled to India and had some influence on Gautama's ideas and behaviour, the most important issue for those of us interested in the philosophy and religious aspect of Buddhism is the wisdom and practicality of the teachings.

[AYJAYDEE]

Go to Nanachat in Ubon or Suan Mokh in Surat thani