- This topic has 7 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Theruwan saranai everyone!
Can someone please explain the correct meaning of the word “Sanghabheda” ?
In modern translations, it is defined as “causing a schism in the Sangha (order of monks)”.
I am asking this because, this is one of the five heinous crimes. (the other four being obvious)
So it becomes important for us to know the correct meaning of “Sanghabheda”.
-
Yes. What you quoted is correct: “In modern translations, it is defined as “causing a schism in the Sangha (order of monks)”.
How that schism takes place is described in the “Saṅghabheda Sutta (AN 10.37)”.
A good example is the incorrect interpretation of anicca and anatta as impermanence and no-self.
– That had blocked the path of many people over the past several hundred years!
– Teaching “adhamma” as “Buddha Dhamma” can have serious kammic consequences. -
Follow up questions:
1) Did those Mahayana monks commit sanghabheda when they separated from the Ariya Sangha and started their own concepts of “Higher vehicle” and started treating Theravada as lower (or inferior) vehicle? Did they commit Sanghabheda when they introduced many new “Sutras” such as the Lotus Sutra and attributed it to the Buddha himself!
2) Did Buddhaghosa commit Sanghabheda when he introduced his Visuddhimagga with mundane interpretations of Buddha Dhamma?
3) I read in Dhammawheel forum that Sangha nayakas (and many other bhikkhus) in Sri Lanka doesn’t accept Waharaka Thero’s interpretations, instead they treat this sect as “rebels” and having strong miccha ditthi distorting the Buddha’s words and spreading lies to the public.
So are these Sangha nayaka and other bhikkhus also committing Sanghabheda? -
Yes to all three.
You wrote: Sangha nayakas (and many other bhikkhus) in Sri Lanka doesn’t accept Waharaka Thero’s interpretations, instead they treat this sect as “rebels” and having strong miccha ditthi distorting the Buddha’s words and spreading lies to the public.”
It does not matter if “Sangha nayakas” do not accept the interpretations of Waharaka Thero.
– The question to be asked is: “Is there a way to check who is teaching the correct Dhamma.The only way to do that is to “find holes” in a given interpretation.
– I have done that in many posts at this website.
– In fact, I recently started a new section to point out the inconsistencies/contradictions of many interpretations pushed by those “Sangha nayakas”: “Elephants in the Room”
– I welcome any evidence that may contradict my points in those posts.
– Of course, I do understand that those incorrect interpretations have come down over many generations. It is not the fault of “Sangha nayakas” DIRECTLY.
– However, they need to take time and evaluate the evidence that I have provided. My issue with them is that they are so adamant in their wrong views, even after evidence is presented that they DO have wrong views about Buddha Dhamma.They may not do that. It is up to them. But it is the responsibility of others to read both sides and decide which interpretations are correct.
– I may have made some MINOR errors too. But those would be insignificant compared to the mistakes they have made in the foundations of Buddha Dhamma. -
Yes to all three.
You wrote:”Sangha nayakas (and many other bhikkhus) in Sri Lanka doesn’t accept Waharaka Thero’s interpretations, instead they treat this sect as “rebels” and having strong miccha ditthi distorting the Buddha’s words and spreading lies to the public.”
It does not matter if “Sangha nayakas” do not accept the interpretations of Waharaka Thero.
– The question to be asked is: “Is there a way to check who is teaching the correct Dhamma?”The only way to do that is to “find holes” in a given interpretation.
– I have done that in many posts on this website.
– In fact, I recently started a new section to point out the inconsistencies/contradictions of many interpretations pushed by those “Sangha nayakas”: “Elephants in the Room”
– I welcome any evidence that may contradict my points in those posts.
– Of course, I do understand that those incorrect interpretations have come down over many generations. It is not the fault of “Sangha nayakas” DIRECTLY.
– However, they need to take time and evaluate the evidence that I have provided. My issue with them is that they are so adamant in their wrong views, even after evidence is presented that they DO have wrong views about Buddha Dhamma.They may not do that. It is up to them. But it is the responsibility of others to read both sides and decide which interpretations are correct.
– I may have made some MINOR errors too. But those would be insignificant compared to the mistakes they have made in the foundational aspects of Buddha Dhamma. -
-
The question to be asked is: “Is there a way to check who is teaching the correct Dhamma?”
The only way to do that is to “find holes” in a given interpretation.
– If I may add, through one’s practice as well.
What I can say is that the Buddha dhamma that I learned from Venerable Waharaka Thero, here (Puredhamma Lal), other Puredhamma participants here and other thero’s / teachers that teaches the dhamma that leads to nibbana. I can clearly see the change in my mano, vaci, kaya sankhara’s compared to 10,5,1 years ago and recently, the change has been quite dramatic . . .
On DW, I pretty much almost went through most of the comments (not all) in the topic about the teachings of Ven. Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero. As much as I can see, pretty much no one was able to refute (to my satisfaction) on what Lal posted on there. I wrote extra information about this, but decided to delete it since there’s no benefit for me to say more about this topic.
Anyways . . .I feel the Buddha dhamma situation out there is quite the mess . . . People not being taught properly; when the chance to learn and comprehend the dhamma that leads to nibbana comes, many are not able to see and use it. Through my browsing experience through Buddhist forums, I often see many . . . repeating questions being asked, some none beneficial or important and some is just a total waste of time and mind energy. Some discussions end up in arguments, with commitment of vaci abhisankhara involved. It seems likes some are there to “have fun”
It’s like . . . they go there to learn or have fun . . . but end up blocking their own path to Nibbana through akusala mula p.s. Never really thought about this deeply, but now typing this, I’m asking myself does it make sense to do something like this?But ya . . . it’s quite . . . depressing and disheartening (best way that I can put this, but not really since I have been down this road so so many times before . . . even in the mundane world ) to see the current state of the Buddha dhamma and the practitioners of the Buddha Dhamma. Recently, I came across a post that shared a part of a translated sutta, I never knew such a translation was out there.
asubhā bhāvetabbā rāgassa pahānāya, mettā bhāvetabbā byāpādassa pahānāya, ānāpānassati bhāvetabbā vitakkupacchedāya, aniccasaññā bhāvetabbā asmimānasamugghātāya. Variant: ānāpānassati → ānāpānasati (bj, pts1ed)”
“They should develop the perception of ugliness to give up greed, love to give up hate, mindfulness of breathing to cut off thinking, and perception of impermanence to uproot the conceit ‘I am’.
There are many more people out there that know more Pali and read the sutta’s more than me. But after seeing how those “bhavana’s are being translated into English, I was kinda shocked . . . It’s up to each person to decide what is right / correct for them . . .But my own understanding of those “translated bhavana’s” is totally different than what’s being translated as.
So fortunate . . . to be able to come across other explanations / teachings that makes sense, different from what’s usually taken at face value . . . Otherwise, I might try to see ugliness in everything and get patigha or try to huff and puff my way to Nibbana.
At our current time, coming across and being able to see / comprehend some truths from the Buddha, Dhamma, “Sangha”, Venerable Waharaka Abhayaratanalankara Thero, Puredhamma (Lal), us forum participants here, and other teachers of similar Dhamma. I feel / know that we are some of the most fortunate living beings in this world. May we all satta’s be able to come across the Buddha dhamma that helps us to attain and attain the supreme peace and freedom of Nibbana.
-
-
Christian wrote: “The problem with checking is that person who checks it needs to have considerate high panna too.”
Yes. That could be correct regarding deeper aspects of Buddha Dhamma, like describing anicca and anatta.
However, there are many other contradictions that can be seen without any knowledge of Pali or even any knowledge of the basic aspects of Buddhism.
For example, the verse, “..avijjā paccayā saṅkhārā, saṅkhāra paccayā viññāṇaṁ.” in the “Paṭhamabodhi Sutta (Ud 1.1)“ is translated as “.Ignorance is a condition for choices. Choices are a condition for consciousness.”
Now the next sutta (“Dutiyabodhi Sutta (Ud 1.2)“) describes what happens when one attains Buddhahood/Arahanthood. That is the reverse of Paticca Samuppada’s steps in the above: “.avijjā nirodhā saṅkhāranirodho, saṅkhāra nirodhā viññāṇa nirodho.”
– That is translated as “.When ignorance ceases, choices cease. When choices cease, consciousness ceases..”Did the Buddha (or any Arahant) lose consciousness upon attaining Buddhahood/Arahanthood?
– The problem should be obvious to even a child!The problem is that even to this day, those translators don’t seem to understand that there are different types of viññāṇa.
– Translating viññāṇa as “consciousness” is only appropriate for “vipaka viññāṇa.”
– Viññāṇa in Paticca Samuppada is “kamma viññāṇa.”I discussed this in detail (with those references) in the post: “Distortion of Pāli Keywords in Paṭicca Samuppāda”
– I don’t understand why no one is questioning those translators about such obvious contradictions.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.