A History of Indian Buddhism - book

I just bought this book today from a Buddhist bookstore in Hong Kong. Hope it's good!

The author is Hirakawa Akira, translated by Paul Groner, first published in India in 1993, then reprinted again in 1998 and 2007.

Concepts in Mahayana considered heterodoxy according to the Theravadins

From E-Sangha forum's thread

Bits by Venerable Dhammanando

"...But seriously, the Kathāvatthu of the Abhidhamma Piṭaka records the Third Council debates on a great many views, though it doesn't say who held which view (that is left to the Kathāvatthu commentary, composed centuries later). However, a number of the views rejected by the Theravāda seem to exhibit proto-Mahāyānic tendencies. These tendencies are towards docetism, merit transference, the Mahāyānist conception of prajñāpāramitā, downgrading of the arahant and various miscellaneous matters.

Below I list the main ones:


1. Parihāni micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant may fall away from arahantship.
2. Parūpahāra micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant may have a seminal emission while sleeping.
3. Aññāṇa micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant lacks knowledge.
4. Kaṅkhā micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant may have doubts.
5. Paravitāraṇa micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant is excelled by others.
6. Vohāra micchādiṭṭhi — that the Buddha’s everday speech was supramundane.
7. Ariyanti micchādiṭṭhi — that all ten Tathāgata Powers are ariyan.
8. Niyāmokkanti micchādiṭṭhi — that a Bodhisatta becomes an ariyan before his final life.
9. Anāgatañāṇa micchādiṭṭhi — that there is knowledge of the future.
10. Paṭuppanna micchādiṭṭhi — that all present events may be simultaneously known.
11. Paribhogamayapuñña micchādiṭṭhi — that merit increases with utility.
12. Itodinna micchādiṭṭhi — that what is given here sustains elsewhere.
13. Pathavī kammavipākoti micchādiṭṭhi — that the earth is kamma-produced.
14. Chagati micchādiṭṭhi — that there are six realms.
15. Antarābhava micchādiṭṭhi — that there is an intermediate state.
16. Amatārammaṇa micchādiṭṭhi — that the Deathless may be an object of attachment for an arahant.
17. Iddhibala micchādiṭṭhi — that through the power of psychic mastery one may live for an aeon.
18. Kamma micchādiṭṭhi — that all kamma gives rise to vipāka.
19. Saddo vipākoti micchādiṭṭhi — that sound is the result of kamma.
20. Saḷāyatana micchādiṭṭhi — that the six sense-bases are the result of kamma.
21. Jīvitā voropana micchādiṭṭhi — that one of right view may take life.
22. Na vattabbaṃ saṅgho dakkhiṇaṃ paṭiggaṇhāti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that the sangha accepts gifts.
23. Na vattabbaṃ saṅgho dakkhiṇaṃ visodhetīti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that the sangha purifies gifts.
24. Na vattabbaṃ saṅgho bhuñjatīti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that the sangha eats.
25. Na vattabbaṃ saṅghassadinnaṃ mahapphalanti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that a gift to the sangha brings great reward.
26. Na vattabbaṃ buddhassadinnaṃ mahapphalanti micchādiṭṭhi — that it should not be said that anything given to the Buddha brings great reward.
27. Aparinipphanna micchādiṭṭhi — that the aggregates, elements etc. are all undetermined.
28. Manussaloka micchādiṭṭhi — that it is wrong to say that the Buddha lived in the world of men.
29. Dhammadesanā micchādiṭṭhi — that it is wrong to say that the Buddha taught the Dhamma.
30. Tathatā micchādiṭṭhi — that there is a ‘thusness’ that is the fundamental character of all things.
31. Nirayapāla micchādiṭṭhi — that there are no guards in the hell realm.
32. Sāsana micchādiṭṭhi — that the Buddha’s Dispensation may be improved.
33. Saṃyojana micchādiṭṭhi — that after arahantship some fetters may remain.
34. Buddha micchādiṭṭhi — that Buddhas differ from one another in grades.
35. Sabbadisā micchādiṭṭhi — that the Buddhas persist in all directions.
36. Parinibbāna micchādiṭṭhi — that an arahant’s final Nibbāna may be attained without all fetters having been cast off.
37. Issariyakāma micchādiṭṭhi — that Bodhisattas may be voluntarily reborn in hell or other evil states.

........"

Bits about Kathavatthu and its origin from wiki

----------------------------------------

Well, well...

Kind of amusing, I think. In my opinion, the differences between Mahayana and Theravada will be there for a long time for us to debate on. There will be those who wish to maintain that one is right and the other completely wrong, while at the same time there will be those in the other end of the spectrum who wish to reconcile the two. But perhaps Mahayana and Theravada beliefs can never be reconciled by referring to scriptures. New practitioners may simply have to choose which are the most appropriate and "sound right the most" for them to choose to follow (as they are not yet enlightened).

Another thoughts, perhaps for those enlightened ones, the focus on differences may not be worth putting one's effort on too much as it may not lead one to "the end of dukkha" and "the realization of the 4NT" from Theravada's point of view, or to what Mahayana practitioners call "the realization of emptiness" (!?) - probably the same anyway, and is the goal of Buddhism, all traditions, all schools. May be the realized masters of any schools don't bother. "The Truth" as directly realized by Buddhist masters are the same.

Why do Buddhist masters of different traditions and schools sometime talk about the same "Truth" even though they live far apart or even in different times? I think it takes real practice to realize the Truth, and not just scripture debates. By realizing for oneself, the quarrels between traditions become nonsense.

The 4th jhana

"The fourth jhana is a state of profound stillness and peace, in which the mind rests with unshakeable one-pointedness and equanimity, and breathing has calmed to the point of stopping. The mind has a radiant purity, due to its "brightly shining" depths having been uncovered and made manifest at the surface level. It is said to be very "workable" and "adaptable" like refined gold, which can be used to make all manner of precious and wonderful things. It is thus an ideal take-off point for various further developments. Indeed it seems to have been the state from which the Buddha went on to attain enlightment."

(Harvey 1990, 250-2)

Some discussions on Mahayana and Theravada

at E-Sangha

HERE

and
HERE

and
HERE

and

HERE

and more !!! Seems to be a popular topic nowadays.

My post on "vi~n~naana.m andassana.m"

At E-Sangha...

Disclaimer: this is my understanding from practicing in the Thai forest tradition, but what I am writing below does not represent the teachings of the forest tradition, only my limited understanding of it.

Regarding "vi~n~naana.m andassana.m", it is unconditioned. Since it is unconditioned, it cannot interact with anything. It cannot influence samsara, nor can it be influenced by samsara. It is not a controller of anything as it does not have any ability to control, or be controlled.

Since it is "unborn" and "deathless", there is no concept of time. Time does not apply. Time only applies to things that are conditioned, like the five aggregates. For the unconditioned, time simply does not exist. No time.

We are so caught up with samsara way of thinking where time is an inescapable reality, and as we never have experienced anything that is “not bound by time”, we always think of this as having to be either nihilistic or eternalistic. But both terms do not apply.

The only reason that, in my understanding, " vi~n~naana.m andassana.m" is used is because of the quality of knowing. However, this quality is of “simply knowing” only, and not of thinking, not understanding, not comprehending, not storing any tiny bits of memory. Simply knows. Luminous because knowing is limitless, but there light/color/darkness do not apply.

When we use the word mind, we think of a thing. This is not a thing either, and cannot be found, and does not exist nor not exist. It is not the mind. Sometimes the word mind is used simply because for lack of better words.

Is it Self or True Self? Far from that as well. Self or whatever we call me or mine only belongs to samsara. “We” are the self, the illusion, the concept. The “one” that knows is also a concept. It's not also the new-age or ancient-age "one with all, and all with one". Or getting back into the Atman either, no mini Me finally rejoining the Big Me.

But this can be known, and the only way that it is known is directly from practice to see samsara as is. Simple. But that "direct knowledge" of is also in samsara. As this can be known, some Buddhist practitioners do not deny it. Some may not like to talk much about it as it is incomprehensible, and unexplainable, and only to be known by oneself. But since we have not yet experienced this , it does not mean that this is "false" or "wrong". [I know, some wouldn't want to anyway, or say it's a fake mind-made thing, whatever.]

For those who have direct knowledge of this "vi~n~naana.m andassana.m", which is also not any jhanic states either as it does not belong to any realms of existence nor does it have any kinds of existence (nor not exist), it is more true than anything in front of our eyes.

PS – I do not equate this to nibbana though.

Just my limited understanding from listening and learning from some meditation masters.

Emptyuniverse on "vi~n~naana.m andassana.m"

A post by Emptyuniverse at E-Sangha...


Anyhoo, since it's now established that one who translates vi~n~naana.m andassana.m as "non-manifestative consciousness," etc., isn't necessarily a heretic guilty of wrong view, it's worth looking at this second allegation: that this translation is merely an oxymoron.

First, a list of some authors and translators who have seen fit to translate vi~n~naana.m andassana.m along these lines:

- the consciousness that makes no showing (Ven. Nanamoli)
- non-manifestative consciousness (Ven. Nyanananda)
- consciousness non-manifesting (from A Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya by Ven. Nanamoli and Ven. Bodhi)
- awakened consiciousness (from the Introduction of Ven. Sumedho's Intuitive Awareness)
- consciousness which is unmanifest (Ven. Amaro)
- consciousness without feature, consciousness without surface (Ven. Thanissaro)
- non-manifestative consciousness (Ven. Analayo)
- where consciousness is signless (M. Walshe)
- undemonstratable consciousness (Jeffrey Hopkins, Ven. Lati Rimpoche, trans. of rnam shes bstan med, from The Buddhism of Tibet)

Second, Ven. Bodhi's translation of this term in MN 49: Brahmanimantanika Sutta:

Consciousness non-manifesting,
Boundless, luminous all-round:

that is not pataken of by the earthness of earth, that is not partaken of by the waterness of water ... that is not partaken of by the allness of all.

And his reason for departing from the commentary when doing so (endnote 513 from The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya):

These lines (which also apear as part of a full verse at DN 11.85/i.223) have been a perennial challenge to Buddhist scholarship, and even Aacariya Buddhaghosa seems to founder over them. MA takes the subject of the sentence to be Nibbaana, called "consciousness" (vi~n~naa.na.m) in the sense that "it can be cognized" (vijaanitabba.m). This derivation is hardly credible, since nowhere in the Nikaayas is Nibbaana described as consciousness, nor is it possible to derive an active noun from the gerundive. MA explains anidassana.m as meaning invisible, "because it (Nibbaana) does not come within range of eye-consciousness," but again this is a trite explanation. The word anidassana occurs at MN 21.14 in the description of empty space as an unsuitable medium for painting pictures; thus the idea seems to be that of not making manifest.

MA offers three explanations of sabbato pabha.m: (1) completely possessed of luminosity (pabhaa); (2) possessing being (pabhuuta.m) everywhere; and (3) a ford (pabha.m) accessible from all sides, i.e. through any of the thirty-eight meditation objects. Only the first of these seems to have any linguistic legitimacy.

Ven. Nyanananda's comments on this same excerpt from MN 49:

In the Brahmanimantanikasutta of the Majjhima Nikaaya, also, the first two lines of the verse, vi~n~naana.m anidassana.m, anan­ta.m sabbato pabha.m, occur. But here the commentator follows a dif­ferent line of interpretation. Whereas in his commentary to the Keva.d.dhasutta he explains anidas­sana.m as an epithet of Nibbaana, in the sense of having nothing to compare with, here he takes it in the sense of not being visi­ble to the eye. Cakkhuvi~n~naa.nassa aapaatha.m anupagamanato ani­dassana.m naama, "it is called anidassana be­cause it does not come within the range of eye-consciousness".

In explaining the term sabbato pabha.m, he suggests several alter­native interpretations. In the first interpretation, he takes pabhaa to mean light, or lustre. Sabbato pabhan'ti sabbato pabhaa­sampanna.m. Nibbaanato hi a~n~no dhammo sappabhataro vaa joti­vantataro vaa pari­suddhataro vaa pa.n.darataro vaa natthi. "Sabbato pabha.m means more lustrous than anything else. For there is nothing more lustrous or lu­minous or purer or whiter than Nib­baana".

The etymology of the term sabbato pabha.m has been given a twist, for the word sabbato is taken in a comparative sense, 'more lustrous than anything'. As we have pointed out, the term actu­ally means 'lustrous on all sides'. Then a second interpretation is given, bringing in the word pabhuu, 'lord' or 'chief'. Sabbato vaa pabhuu, that is to say more prominent than anything else. In sup­port of it he says: Asukadisaaya naama nibbaana.m natthii'ti na vat­tabba.m, "it should not be said that in such and such a direction Nibbaana is not to be found". He says that it is called pabhuu, or lord, because it is to be found in all directions. Only as the third interpretation he cites his simile of the ford already given in his commentary to the Keva.d.dhasutta.

What is the reason for giving so many figurative interpreta­tions as alternatives to such a significant verse? Surely the Bud­dha would not have intended the verse to convey so many con­flicting meanings, when he preached it.

No doubt the commentators have made a great effort to pre­serve the Dhamma, but due to some unfortunate historical cir­cumstances, most of the deep discourses dealing with the sub­ject of Nibbaana have been handed down without even a clue to the correct version among variant readings. This has left the commentators nonplussed, so much so that they had to give us several vague and alternative inter­pretations to choose from. It is up to us to decide, whether we should accept this position as it is, or try to improve on it by exploring any other possible means of explanation.

We had occasion to mention in our very first sermon that the Bud­dha himself has prophesied that those discourse which deal with voidness would, in time to come, go into disuse, with their deeper meanings obscured. The interpretations just quoted go to show that already the prediction has come true to a great ex­tent.

And third, the relevant passage from DN 11: Kevaddha Sutta (Nyanananda trans.):

Consciousness, which is non-manifestative,
Endless, lustrous on all sides[....]

And his comments regarding Ven. Buddhaghosa's treatment of these lines:

The commentator begins his exposition with the word vi~n~naa.na.m itself. He comes out with a peculiar etymology: Vi~n~naa.nan'ti tattha vi~n~naatabbanti vi~n~naa.na.m nibbaanassa naama.m, which means that the word vi~n~naa.na, or consciousness, is in this context a synonym for Nibbaana, in the sense that it is 'to be known', vi~n~naatabba.m. This forced etymology is far from con­vincing, since such a usage is not attested elsewhere. Moreover, we come across a long list of epithets for Nibbaana, as many as thirty-three, in the Asa.nkhatasa.myutta of the Sa.myutta Nikaaya, but vi~n~naa.na is not counted as one. In fact, no­where in the dis­courses is vi~n~naa.na used as a synonym for Nibbaana.

Next, he takes up the word anidassana, and makes the fol­lowing comment: Tad eta.m nidassanaabhaavato anidassana.m, that Nibbaana is called anidassana because no illustration for it could be given. The idea is that it has nothing to compare with. Then comes the explana­tion of the word ananta.m. According to the commentator Nibbaana is called ananta, endless, because it has neither the arising-end, up­paadanto, nor the falling-end, vayanto, nor the otherwiseness of the persisting-end, .thitassa a~n~nathatta. Strangely enough, even the last mentioned middle-state is counted as an 'end' in the commentators concept of three ends. So this is the substance of his commentary to the first three words vi~n~naa.na.m, anidassana.m, ananta.m.

The commentarial interpretation of the term sabbato pabha.m is even more confusing. The word pabhaa is explained as a syno­nym for papa, meaning 'ford'. The bha element in the word, he explains, is a result of consonantal interchange with the original pa in papa. Pakaa­rassa pana bhakaaro kato. The idea is that the original form of this particular term for Nibbaana is sabbato pa­pa.m. The meaning attrib­uted to it is 'with fords on all sides'. Nibbaana is supposed to be meta­phorically conceived as the ocean, to get down into which there are fords on all sides, namely the thirty-eight topics of meditation. This interpretation seems rather far fetched. It is as if the commen­tator has re­sorted to this simile of a ford, because he is already 'in deep wa­ters'! The word pabhaa, as it is, clearly means light, or radi­ance, and its association with wisdom is also well attested in the canon.

Just considering these two venerable authors/translators, it seems that they have employed significant textual analysis in departing from the commentaries to give their translation of this term. It's obvious that they don't do so lightly. IMO their analysis is cogent.

Metta.

Beyond enlightenment - buy or read on line !@#?

While I browsed through some books on Buddhism I came across this USD120 book by Richard Cohen called "Beyond Enlightenment: Buddhism, Religion, Modernity (Routledgecurzon Critical Studies in Buddhism)". Obviously, this is another Buddhologist book, where the author only produced a few commercial copies, and not that many people would probably buy them so they have to settle on selling it commercially with a very high price tag (no sarcasm intended).

Anyway, I did a little googling afterward, and found this web sit on the author, which seems legitimate: " Richard Cohen's CV "
where there is a link to the probably all the non-commercial version of the "Beyond Enlightenment" book!

Here is a the "Table of Contents", which seems to be the same...

• Front-pages, Table of Contents, Preface, Acknowledgements
• Chapter 1: A Benign Introduction + notes
  
• Chapter 2: A Place of Exceptional Universal Value + notes
  
• Chapter 3: A Tale of Two Histories + notes
  
• Chapter 4: The Anthropology of Enlightenment + notes
  
• Chapter 5: What Do Gods Have to Do With Enlightenment? + notes
  
• Chapter 6: A Baroque Conclusion + notes
• Bibliography

Have a good, free and legitimate reading!