The Buddha and his Teachings, according to Suttas in the Pali Canon

[bigrooster]

Difference is the views.

The last five fetters to be ditched includes desire for fine material existence and desire for immaterial existence.

Yes right view is crucial.

Before any breakthrough could happen, the personal identity view (sakkaya ditthi) would have to be fully understood and abandoned along with the other two of the three lower fetters first.

 

[Lasogette]

Yes, 八識. The 7th is the defiled consciousness and the 8th is the storehouse consciousness. This teaching/concept is found in Mahayana tradition, and I think it originated from the Yogacara school, IIRC.

Roger. Thanks for the replies. Is pali canon largely Theravada teachings then?

 

[bigrooster]

Roger. Thanks for the replies. Is pali canon largely Theravada teachings then?

Pali Canon started its compilation shortly after the historical Buddha passed away; current existing traditions like Theravada and Mahayana had not yet been born then. Theravada tradition today base its teachings and discipline on the Pali Canon.

 

[Lasogette]

Pali Canon started its compilation shortly after the historical Buddha passed away; current existing traditions like Theravada and Mahayana had not yet been born then. Theravada tradition today base its teachings and discipline on the Pali Canon.

Roger that. Thank u

 

[chintokkong]

Thank u. Not exactly sure. But I think it's call ah Lai ye shi. (8th consciousness) Or some called is storehouse consciousness

The eight vijnanas (eight consciousness) framework is that of the Yogacara system within Mahayana Buddhism. Not really related to the Pali canon.

If you can read Chinese, can consider trying to read up on different explanations of 八識規矩頌 (a summary of the eight consciousnesses). Like this explanation by Shengyen:

http://old.ddc.shengyen.org/mobile/toc/07/07-09/index.php

 

[chintokkong]

AFAIK, no.

Excerpt:
"When their mind has become immersed in samādhi like this—purified, bright, flawless, rid of corruptions, pliable, workable, steady, and imperturbable—they project it and extend it toward the creation of a mind-made body. From this body they create another body, physical, mind-made, complete in all its various parts, not deficient in any faculty.

Suppose a person was to draw a reed out from its sheath. They’d think: ‘This is the reed, this is the sheath. The reed and the sheath are different things. The reed has been drawn out from the sheath.’ "

Online reference: DN 10 - Subha Sutta, Bhikkhu Sujato translation

Speaking of manomayakaya, do you know if there is any difference in usage of the terms “mano“ and “manas”? Or are they used interchangeably?

Been thinking about the triad: citta-mano/manas-vijnana. I understand that they are all terms referring to mind and represent different aspects of mind. But getting a little confused over “mano” and “manas”. Seem to me to be the same?

Also, can the sixth sense-root be interchangeably called “mano” and “manas”?

 

[Lasogette]

The eight vijnanas (eight consciousness) framework is that of the Yogacara system within Mahayana Buddhism. Not really related to the Pali canon.

If you can read Chinese, can consider trying to read up on different explanations of 八識規矩頌 (a summary of the eight consciousnesses). Like this explanation by Shengyen:

http://old.ddc.shengyen.org/mobile/toc/07/07-09/index.php

Thanks u sir. Am not really aware of the history of Mahayana and Theravada as my studies are largely pure land and am trying to figure out these as I recently hear some sutra about 8th consciousness and found it very interesting.

 

[chintokkong]

Thanks u sir. Am not really aware of the history of Mahayana and Theravada as my studies are largely pure land and am trying to figure out these as I recently hear some sutra about 8th consciousness and found it very interesting.

Yah the eight conciousnesses of yogacara is a sophisticated model of the mind. Very interesting.

.

Not sure if this is helpful in clarifying terms like Mahayana and Theravada.
Basically one way of categorising the whole of Buddhism is into three vehicles (yana) - sravaka-yana, pratyekabuddha-yana and bodhisattva-yana. The first two work mainly towards arahanthood, while the last works towards buddhahood.
What we call mahayana nowadays is basically the bodhisattva-yana. The aim is buddhahood.

Within each vehicle (yana), there are different buddhist schools. Like Pureland is a school of mahayana. While Theravada is a school of sravaka-yana.

If I’m not wrong, the Theravada is largely based on the teachings of the Pali canon (which is sravaka-yana). While Yogacara is a philosophical system within the mahayana, so not quite part of the scope of the Pali canon.

But to try to understand yogacara, it can help a lot to learn first the basics provided in the Pali canon, like that of the six sense bases (six ayatanas). The Pali canon is really great in providing a fundamental understanding of how Buddhism works.

 

[bigrooster]

Yah the eight conciousnesses of yogacara is a sophisticated model of the mind. Very interesting.

.

Not sure if this is helpful in clarifying terms like Mahayana and Theravada.
Basically one way of categorising the whole of Buddhism is into three vehicles (yana) - sravaka-yana, pratyekabuddha-yana and bodhisattva-yana. The first two work mainly towards arahanthood, while the last works towards buddhahood.
What we call mahayana nowadays is basically the bodhisattva-yana. The aim is buddhahood.

Within each vehicle (yana), there are different buddhist schools. Like Pureland is a school of mahayana. While Theravada is a school of sravaka-yana.

If I’m not wrong, the Theravada is largely based on the teachings of the Pali canon (which is sravaka-yana). While Yogacara is a philosophical system within the mahayana, so not quite part of the scope of the Pali canon.

But to try to understand yogacara, it can help a lot to learn first the basics provided in the Pali canon, like that of the six sense bases (six ayatanas). The Pali canon is really great in providing a fundamental understanding of how Buddhism works.

Śrāvakayāna (聲聞乘) is viewed from the perspective of Sarvāstivāda, and then Mahāyāna. These segregation of -yāna and -vāda came about after schisms in the Saṅgha, since ~100 years after the Buddha's death. Thick books on the history of the different traditions/sects of Buddhism have been written and published through the years - not a topic that could be dealt with in 三言兩語. For those who are interested, Indian Buddhism by A.K. Warder could be a good recommendation. https://www.amazon.sg/Indian-Buddhism-K-Warder/dp/8120817419

Pacceka-buddha (Sanskrit: Pratyekabuddha; Pratyekabuddhayana - 緣覺乘) are translated as Private Buddha, Silent Buddha, or Solitary Buddha. They attained liberation through their own effort, just like our Buddha Gotama. They appear during periods without Dhamma being made known, and they are not able to form a dispensation and teach the Dhamma, due to the absence of requisite conditions to do so. So, they are different from the Arahant disciples of the Buddha, who attained Arahantship after listening to and practising the Dhamma (聲聞); they are also not Sammasambuddha like Buddha Gotama, due to the reasons mentioned above.

It pays to remember this: the Buddha did not teach any yāna or -vāda; he taught the way to liberation. And the recipe/instruction manual is inside the 4 Noble Truths (1st discourse of the Buddha).

 

[Lasogette]

Śrāvakayāna (聲聞乘) is viewed from the perspective of Sarvāstivāda, and then Mahāyāna. These segregation of -yāna and -vāda came about after schisms in the Saṅgha, since ~100 years after the Buddha's death. Thick books on the history of the different traditions/sects of Buddhism have been written and published through the years - not a topic that could be dealt with in 三言兩語. For those who are interested, Indian Buddhism by A.K. Warder could be a good recommendation. https://www.amazon.sg/Indian-Buddhism-K-Warder/dp/8120817419

Pacceka-buddha (Sanskrit: Pratyekabuddha; Pratyekabuddhayana - 緣覺乘) are translated as Private Buddha, Silent Buddha, or Solitary Buddha. They attained liberation through their own effort, just like our Buddha Gotama. They appear during periods without Dhamma being made known, and they are not able to form a dispensation and teach the Dhamma, due to the absence of requisite conditions to do so. So, they are different from the Arahant disciples of the Buddha, who attained Arahantship after listening to and practising the Dhamma (聲聞); they are also not Sammasambuddha like Buddha Gotama, due to the reasons mentioned above.

It pays to remember this: the Buddha did not teach any yāna or -vāda; he taught the way to liberation. And the recipe/instruction manual is inside the 4 Noble Truths (1st discourse of the Buddha).

Hmm. So it's not possible for a person to be a pratyeka Buddha now because the dharma is present ?

 

[bigrooster]

Hmm. So it's not possible for a person to be a pratyeka Buddha now because the dharma is present ?

From the definition, yes.

Imho, the Dhamma is still very much alive.

From the suttas, the Buddha mentioned the reasons for true Dhamma to disappear.

In short, 5 things that will lead to the decay and disappearance of the true Dhamma: monastics and lay people without reverence and deference towards the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, the training (Sila and Vinaya), concentration (practise samādhi). So on the converse, the true Dhamma will not disppear (yet) if monastics and lay people maintain their reverence and deference towards the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, the training (Sila and Vinaya), concentration (practise samādhi).

Exerpt:
“There are five things, Kassapa, that lead to the longevity of the true Dhamma, to its nondecay and nondisappearance. What are the five? Here the bhikkhus, the bhikkhunīs, the male lay followers, and the female lay followers dwell with reverence and deference towards the Teacher; they dwell with reverence and deference towards the Dhamma; they dwell with reverence and deference towards the Saṅgha; they dwell with reverence and deference towards the training; they dwell with reverence and deference towards concentration. These, Kassapa, are the five things that lead to the longevity of the true Dhamma, to its nondecay and nondisappearance.”

Online reference: SN 16.13 - Saddhammappatirūpaka Sutta, Bhikkhu Bodhi translation

 

[LoneTraveller]

I don't think softcopy is available. Online once in a blue moon got people sell - this one is considered "antic" status liao.

https://www.carousell.sg/p/buddhist-studies-book-1166185784/

Antique.....

 

[chintokkong]

Śrāvakayāna (聲聞乘) is viewed from the perspective of Sarvāstivāda, and then Mahāyāna. These segregation of -yāna and -vāda came about after schisms in the Saṅgha, since ~100 years after the Buddha's death. Thick books on the history of the different traditions/sects of Buddhism have been written and published through the years - not a topic that could be dealt with in 三言兩語. For those who are interested, Indian Buddhism by A.K. Warder could be a good recommendation. https://www.amazon.sg/Indian-Buddhism-K-Warder/dp/8120817419

Pacceka-buddha (Sanskrit: Pratyekabuddha; Pratyekabuddhayana - 緣覺乘) are translated as Private Buddha, Silent Buddha, or Solitary Buddha. They attained liberation through their own effort, just like our Buddha Gotama. They appear during periods without Dhamma being made known, and they are not able to form a dispensation and teach the Dhamma, due to the absence of requisite conditions to do so. So, they are different from the Arahant disciples of the Buddha, who attained Arahantship after listening to and practising the Dhamma (聲聞); they are also not Sammasambuddha like Buddha Gotama, due to the reasons mentioned above.

Thanks for sharing these info. It’s good to get a broad overview of Buddhism so that won’t get confused with the different teachings in different schools and traditions which sometimes may appear to contradict one another.

It pays to remember this: the Buddha did not teach any yāna or -vāda; he taught the way to liberation. And the recipe/instruction manual is inside the 4 Noble Truths (1st discourse of the Buddha).

Many Singaporeans, especially the chinese, might be more familiar with mahayana (like the pureland or the zen school etc). Many of the questions posed here might come from such a perspective too. Although the suttas in the Pali canon do not touch on yana, the mahayana sutras and sastras do talk about it.

There isn’t strong explicit emphasis on 4 noble truths in such texts too, unlike the suttas and the abhidamma texts of the Pali canon, which can cause confusion If not studied and practised in proper context.
Like the famous Heart Sutra for example, which states the negation of 4 noble truths, 5 aggregates, 18 realms, 12 nidanas etc. Because the aim of these sutras is different from that of the suttas in the Pali canon.

So I think it helps to have a broad view of Buddhism in context of the arahant-ideal and bodhisattva-ideal to better appreciate the nuances of the teachings in the Pali canon to also better appreciate their own affiliation of Buddhism.

 

[bigrooster]

Thanks for sharing these info. It’s good to get a broad overview of Buddhism so that won’t get confused with the different teachings in different schools and traditions which sometimes may appear to contradict one another.



Many Singaporeans, especially the chinese, might be more familiar with mahayana (like the pureland or the zen school etc). Many of the questions posed here might come from such a perspective too. Although the suttas in the Pali canon do not touch on yana, the mahayana sutras and sastras do talk about it.

There isn’t strong explicit emphasis on 4 noble truths in such texts too, unlike the suttas and the abhidamma texts of the Pali canon, which can cause confusion If not studied and practised in proper context.
Like the famous Heart Sutra for example, which states the negation of 4 noble truths, 5 aggregates, 18 realms, 12 nidanas etc. Because the aim of these sutras is different from that of the suttas in the Pali canon.

So I think it helps to have a broad view of Buddhism in context of the arahant-ideal and bodhisattva-ideal to better appreciate the nuances of the teachings in the Pali canon to also better appreciate their own affiliation of Buddhism.

There is a reason why there are different Buddhist traditions today; because there are differences. Even within a specific tradition like Theravada, there are further "lineages", and the individual monastics in this tradition could have different interpretations of the teachings too.

It is certainly helpful to have or give a broader view of Buddhism with respect to the different traditions or "ideals".

As you mentioned, many Singaporeans might be more familiar with Mahayana tradition and practices. The knowledge, interest and practices based on the Pali Canon teachings are relatively small here in SG and on this forum, based on my observation. That is the reason why I started this niche thread to share, to introduce, and to inform, based on what I know; I will answer questions that I can answer too, while not losing focus on the thread subject matter.

 

[chintokkong]

There is a reason why there are different Buddhist traditions today; because there are differences. Even within a specific tradition like Theravada, there are further "lineages", and the individual monastics in this tradition could have different interpretations of the teachings too.

It is certainly helpful to have or give a broader view of Buddhism with respect to the different traditions or "ideals".

As you mentioned, many Singaporeans might be more familiar with Mahayana tradition and practices. The knowledge, interest and practices based on the Pali Canon teachings are relatively small here in SG and on this forum, based on my observation. That is the reason why I started this niche thread to share, to introduce, and to inform, based on what I know; I will answer questions that I can answer too, while not losing focus on the thread subject matter.

Yup this is a great thread that you have inteoducing the Pali canon to Singaporeans. Much appreciated, thanks!

 

[bigrooster]

Speaking of manomayakaya, do you know if there is any difference in usage of the terms “mano“ and “manas”? Or are they used interchangeably?

Been thinking about the triad: citta-mano/manas-vijnana. I understand that they are all terms referring to mind and represent different aspects of mind. But getting a little confused over “mano” and “manas”. Seem to me to be the same?

Also, can the sixth sense-root be interchangeably called “mano” and “manas”?

Based on my understanding, in brief:

Mano - mind, the mind
Mana - with the mind/by the mind/doing-something-with-the-mind

Example 1: Verse 1 of the Dhammapada

Manopubbaṅgamā dhammā,
manoseṭṭhā manomayā;
Manasā ce paduṭṭhena,
bhāsati vā karoti vā;
Tato naṁ dukkhamanveti,
cakkaṁva vahato padaṁ.

Mind is the fore-runner of all evil states,
Mind is chief, mind-made are they;
If one speaks or acts with an evil mind,
Suffering follows one,
Just like the cart wheel that follows the ox's feet.

Example 2: Manasikāra
Manasikāra means attention. Its literally meaning is something like "make within the mind", "do within the mind".


Citta - mind, consciousness
Normally used in the context of showing a characteristic or trait of the mind.

Example 1: In the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness, when we contemplate the mind (citta) in the mind, we will be aware of "a mind with lust as a mind with lust", etc.

Example 2: In the Abhidhamma, the different types of consciounsess (citta) were elucidated, such as the types of immoral consciousness, the types of beautiful consciousness.


Viññāṇa - consciousness
Used mainly in the sense consciousness. Example: Eye-consciousness, mind-consciousness (ManoViññāṇa).

 

[Pearce]

anyone can share the meaning of 想，行，识?

Trying to find online but many version.

 

[chintokkong]

Based on my understanding, in brief:

Mano - mind, the mind
Mana - with the mind/by the mind/doing-something-with-the-mind

Example 1: Verse 1 of the Dhammapada

Manopubbaṅgamā dhammā,
manoseṭṭhā manomayā;
Manasā ce paduṭṭhena,
bhāsati vā karoti vā;
Tato naṁ dukkhamanveti,
cakkaṁva vahato padaṁ.

Mind is the fore-runner of all evil states,
Mind is chief, mind-made are they;
If one speaks or acts with an evil mind,
Suffering follows one,
Just like the cart wheel that follows the ox's feet.

Example 2: Manasikāra
Manasikāra means attention. Its literally meaning is something like "make within the mind", "do within the mind".


Citta - mind, consciousness
Normally used in the context of showing a characteristic or trait of the mind.

Example 1: In the 4 Foundations of Mindfulness, when we contemplate the mind (citta) in the mind, we will be aware of "a mind with lust as a mind with lust", etc.

Example 2: In the Abhidhamma, the different types of consciounsess (citta) were elucidated, such as the types of immoral consciousness, the types of beautiful consciousness.


Viññāṇa - consciousness
Used mainly in the sense consciousness. Example: Eye-consciousness, mind-consciousness (ManoViññāṇa).

Thanks for the Pali quotes and the accompanying English translations.

My sense at the moment is that mano and manas are the same, and have to do with volition and other mental factors.
They are also used as the term for mind as the sixth sense-root in correspondence to dhamma as the object.

Just can’t quite figure out when to use as mano and when as manas. Maybe has to do with some rule of the language. Like that of namo and namas (like that of namaste).

 

[bigrooster]

anyone can share the meaning of 想，行，识?

Trying to find online but many version.

想 - Perception (e.g. that's a woman)
行 - Volitional Formations (e.g. she's beautiful, I want to go and meet her)
识 - Consciousness (e.g. eye-consciousness is cognizant of the women, nose-consciousness is aware of her perfume).

These are frequently discussed as part of the 5 aggregartes.

 

[Pearce]

想 - Perception (e.g. that's a woman)
行 - Volitional Formations (e.g. she's beautiful, I want to go and meet her)
识 - Consciousness (e.g. eye-consciousness is cognizant of the women, nose-consciousness is aware of her perfume).

These are frequently discussed as part of the 5 aggregartes.

Even though there's example for volitional, i still do not understand