What the buddha realy realy taught?

[mewtwo]

So do we really i meen really know what the buddha taught besides the four noble truths and eight fold path? I am not talking about zen and such or anything efter the buddha taught but what he really taught.

[Vajrahridaya]

So do we really i meen really know what the buddha taught besides the four noble truths and eight fold path? I am not talking about zen and such or anything efter the buddha taught but what he really taught.

 

It depends upon your level of insight. As according to what we know of how he died, he left through the 4th jhana level, which he associated with the realms of

 

(26) Clear-sighted devas (sudassi deva)

(25) Beautiful devas (sudassa deva)

(24) Untroubled devas (atappa deva)

(23) Devas not Falling Away (aviha deva)

 

and these realms are reachable through high level meditation masters where they can and have received teachings directly from the Buddha after his passing from the physical form. Those that got that far, also realized there were tons and tons of Buddhas and tons of teachings based around the 4 noble truths and 8 fold path and Buddha beings that talk more of the fruit of the path as well with much added detail.

 

Historically, the Mahayana texts were being written down at the same time that the Hinayana texts were being written down. So, much of the Mahayana is attributed to his living speeches while on Earth.

 

Also, if you really understand the teachings, there is a seamless flow between all the vehicles that makes sense. It does to me at least and it does to many that practice Vajrayana and Mahayana. Sure there are some disagreements between different schools, but that's not my concern. There will always be people doing such things. I don't agree with every single text that came about from people writing commentaries on scriptures attributed to Buddhas. But, I do have other worldly experience and know it's possible to receive teachings directly from Buddhas beyond this physical realm. So, I don't have blind faith in the idea that the Buddha taught various things to highly realized masters transcending dimensions. For me, I know this is possible.

 

So yes, I feel that we can know what the Buddha taught beyond what is recorded in the Pali Suttas.

[mewtwo]

yes but what i am getting at is do we really know what the buddha taught excluding after his death and such.

[Vajrahridaya]

yes but what i am getting at is do we really know what the buddha taught excluding after his death and such.

 

Oh, do you mean, do we know he actually taught the 4 noble truths and 8 fold noble path?

 

I think there is plenty of anthropological evidence to suggest that he did.

[mewtwo]

Will start reading the pali canon cause that is the closest thing to what he taught.

Edited November 20, 2010 by mewtwo

[NeiChuan]

Uh Duh Christianity

[mewtwo]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Edited November 21, 2010 by mewtwo

[ralis]

Oh, do you mean, do we know he actually taught the 4 noble truths and 8 fold noble path?

 

I think there is plenty of anthropological evidence to suggest that he did.

 

Please cite the so called evidence.

[RiverSnake]

[xabir2005]

So do we really i meen really know what the buddha taught besides the four noble truths and eight fold path? I am not talking about zen and such or anything efter the buddha taught but what he really taught.

Check out the Pali canon if you're after the original Buddha's words.

 

Core teachings other than 4 noble truths and eight fold paths includes the three characteristics (impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, non-self) of phenomena, dependent origination (e.g. the 12 links of D.O.), karma, and so on.

[mewtwo]

What i have come to understand is we dont really know what the original buddha taught cause there is no record of stuff. Pali canon was writen after the buddha died and they could have changed stuff.

[xabir2005]

What i have come to understand is we dont really know what the original buddha taught cause there is no record of stuff. Pali canon was writen after the buddha died and they could have changed stuff.

Pali canon was recited in the presence of 500 enlightened monks about 2 or 3 weeks after Buddha's demise.

 

Ananda was gifted with perfect memory of everything the Buddha taught (it might sound impossible but it is actually possible: there are several monks even today who had the ability to recite the entire Pali canon from top to bottom, and is even recorded in the Guinness World Records) - and he simply spout out whatever he heard in the 1st Buddhist Council.

 

Furthermore Ananda at that time was already an Arhant - an enlightened monk, and as an enlightened monk he could not have misunderstood what the Buddha taught.

 

Even so if he had said anything wrong, the others of the 500 enlightened arhants would have corrected him. That is the purpose there are so many witnesses to the event.

 

The recited suttas are then passed down orally in masses (which is unlikely to result in any errors as such) and double checked time to time to prevent any loss of transmissions or errors. Then a few centuries later they are recorded in written form.

 

Pali canon is very reliable if you want to know Buddha's original words.

Edited November 21, 2010 by xabir2005

[mewtwo]

ok um not that i dont believe you but you sure the first buddhist coucel was 2 or 3 weeks after his death i heard it was like 3 months and plus ananda did he really recite the whole suttas and not just most of one section of suttas?

 

 

But where should a lay person start with the suttas?

Edited November 21, 2010 by mewtwo

[Vajrahridaya]

I think there is more evidence for the life of the historical Buddha than there is of Jesus or Lau Tzu. The problem with a lot of these really ancient characters is much of the history was oral for quite a while before being written down.

 

The nice thing about the Buddhas history though is that it was kept orally by a whole lot of very clear minded monks who lived their lives repeating what he said and his life was written down by people who were actually witness to it.

 

Very unlike the life of Jesus, even though some of his life was written down by those that were there, much of it was lost, burnt, and the disciples were not very clear minded. The life and time of Jesus was very different from the life and time of the Buddha.

 

Not to mention, the Buddha actually taught methods that one could use to become just like him, and he taught with clear examples, not just parables.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Sloppy Zhang]

Mewtwo, I understand your movement towards finding a teaching which is as close to the "source" as possible, but think of it this way- if it's in the form of some teaching, it MUST go through people somewhere along the way. Even if it is etched in stone by the gods, a human must read it and repeat it, humans must interpret it. Even if you physically go to the site of the stone carving, you have no way of knowing that it was actually written in stone by the gods. It could be fake.

 

Now imagine some power left a message in stone right before your eyes, and it revealed to you the truth path and message of peace. You went to tell everyone, and guess what? Everyone says- you could be lying, we don't know you didn't write it yourself, or make it up, blah blah blah. Even if you were the first person to reveal the message, as long as it is being passed in the form of teaching, it allows the possibility to be corrupted by humans.

 

So what can you do?

 

In a general level, you can find the most trustworthy people. Those with perfect memory who recite and pass on teachings which are verified and corroborated by hundreds of others over dozens of years are fairly reliable in terms of consistency. Of course, one could argue that they could still all work together and create a prepackaged system that they just made up or corrupted.

 

And guess what? Even if they DID transmit the original teachings of the buddha, how do you know the buddha was right? The buddha could have been lying! The buddha could have just been duping people! And he got people to follow him, and they also wanted to dupe people, so they passed on the stories of the buddha! You seem to be investigating possible sources of human corruption, but you, in this thread, are assuming the inherent legitimacy of the buddha's teachings, and that others could have corrupt it. Maybe his teachings were corrupt to begin with!

 

So what can you do?

 

PRACTICE it. Find out for yourself. Does it work for you? If so, DO IT. If it doesn't, guess what? DON'T! It's easy to weed out obvious fakes- people who do not have a legitimate lineage, whose stories do not match up or corroborate with other known facts, etc. More often than not, they can't even keep their OWN story straight. They don't have any successful or known students. But then you got the "big guys", major institutions- Buddhism, Taoism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc etc. You can, with relative ease, trace their lineages and the evolution/preservation of any text they use. What you can't do through scholarly effort and background checking is determine the truth of their teachings. You can't determine through scholarly means if the words they have written down were really truth, were really the revealed message, or anything like that. The only way you are going to do that, is through your own practice and experience.

 

Which is one of the things that Buddhism supports! (if I recall correctly)

Edited November 21, 2010 by Sloppy Zhang

[xabir2005]

ok um not that i dont believe you but you sure the first buddhist coucel was 2 or 3 weeks after his death i heard it was like 3 months and plus ananda did he really recite the whole suttas and not just most of one section of suttas?

Sorry, you're right - I got the facts wrong. It was 3 months, not 3 weeks.

 

Ananda recited most of the suttas, I think there were some parts recited by others.

But where should a lay person start with the suttas?

Hope this helps: Befriending the Suttas: Tips on Reading the Pali Discourses Edited November 21, 2010 by xabir2005

[island]

Not to mention, the Buddha actually taught methods that one could use to become just like him, and he taught with clear examples, not just parables.

 

Gnostics may beg to differ.

Edited November 21, 2010 by island

[Alfred E]

So do we really i meen really know what the buddha taught besides the four noble truths and eight fold path? I am not talking about zen and such or anything efter the buddha taught but what he really taught.

 

I thought this through, some years ago, to my own satisfaction.

The Buddha taught his method - The Way.

It is actually simple: meditation

[Vajrahridaya]

Gnostics may beg to differ.

 

Yes, there is still some Gnostic Christianity going on in Egypt. Don't really know the entirety of their methodology though I've red the Nag Hammadi. Not much on method in there.

[Vajrahridaya]

I thought this through, some years ago, to my own satisfaction.

The Buddha taught his method - The Way.

It is actually simple: meditation

 

He actually taught that meditation alone wouldn't do it. He also taught vipassana, and dependent origination/emptiness. These are very key as meditation alone only leads through the different jhanas. Which prepare one to intuitively know what vipassana and dependent origination teachings are experientially about.

[goldisheavy]

So do we really i meen really know what the buddha taught besides the four noble truths and eight fold path? I am not talking about zen and such or anything efter the buddha taught but what he really taught.

 

Yes. There are two authentic canons of Buddha's teachings. One of them is Pali Canon, of which many texts were translated into English. So you can be rather certain about what Buddha taught for all intents and purposes in this life.

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org

Edited November 21, 2010 by goldisheavy

[goldisheavy]

yes but what i am getting at is do we really know what the buddha taught excluding after his death and such.

 

In this sense we know practically nothing about practically anything.

 

It's not important what Buddha taught. What's important is what people with good reason believe Buddha taught. What did the actual Buddha teach? Who cares? The important thing in Buddhism is not Buddha's person, but his teachings. And what makes the teachings important is not the attribution to Gotama, but their true-to-life quality and logical soundness.

 

If Joe or Bob taught the same teachings, they'd be equally valuable.

Edited November 21, 2010 by goldisheavy

[Jetsun]

I had a lot of thought along these lines, my conclusion was that many of the sutras were given to specific people at a specific time for a specific purpose which is why so much of it is contradictory, so if you were to meet the Buddha now he may say things to you not said in any sutra as every situation is unique and many of the other teachings would be not much use to you. The basic truths will never change but the most suitable methods to arrive at those truths might change from age to age or place to place. This disheartened me first of all but then I met a Buddhist who clearly knew or had been able to apply the teachings to his life as he was so open hearted and clear while also being strong and brave enough to be open to the sufferings of the world without being bogged down or depressed, and when I studied what he knew it was clear that he had complete faith in other Buddhist masters as enlightened beings such as Nargarjuna, Atisha and Shantideva just as much as the Buddha, so I guess what I'm saying is that when you meet someone who radiates the teachings in their presence you gain great confidence in the teachings of the Buddha and also the other masters and the issue of how accurate the first teachings are becomes less important as you have witnessed yourself their benefit.

[island]

[Vajrahridaya]