[Buddha-l] Re: Greetings from Oviedo

[Benito Carral]

On Monday, October 10, 2005, Joy Vriens wrote:

>> [...]  I  wouldn't  like  to see a democratic sangha
>> [...]  I  can't imagine monks and nuns saying to the
>> Old Guy what he should teach [...]

> Yet it is very likely that is the way it happened.

   I doubt it very much.

> There  seemed  to  have been a sort of egality in the
> early  communities  (they called each other "friend",
> the Elder approach being something from later times).

   According  to the early tradition, these are some of
the Old Guy's quotes:

    I  have  no  teacher, one like me does not exist in
    all  the  world, for I am the Peerless Teacher, the
    Arahat. I alone am Supremely Enlightened. Quenching
    all  defilements, Nibbâna's calm have I attained. I
    go  to  the city of Kâsi (Benares) to set in motion
    the  Wheel  of  Dhamma.  In a world where blindness
    reigns, I shall beat the Deathless Drum.


    Address not the Tathâgata (Perfect One) by the word
    'âvuso'   (friend).  The  Tathâgata,  monks,  is  a
    Consummate  One  (Arahat),  a Supremely Enlightened
    One.  Give  ear,  monks,  the  Deathless  has  been
    attained.  I  shall instruct you, I shall teach you
    the Dhamma; following my teaching you will know and
    realize  for  yourselves even in this lifetime that
    supreme  goal  of  purity  for  the  sake  of which
    clansmen  retire  from  home to follow the homeless
    life.

   Then the sangha was divided according to the dharmic
(a  way  to  avoid  using 'spiritual') attaiment of its
members.  (We  can  also  remember Ananda and the First
Council.)

> Also,  imagine  you start a new religion or religious
> system.  You  would  start by sharing your ideas with
> others.  You  wouldn't  have the authority of an "Old
> Guy" (generalissimo) right from the start.

   It  seems  that  the Old Guy first won his authority
while  he  was a forest ascetic, then his demeanour and
discourse  convinced  his  five old fellows, and that's
how  the new religion started. The Old Guy didn't share
ideas  in order to debate them in any democratic sense,
he  shared  truths  to be experienced (in fact, his old
fellows  just  needed to listen such truths in order to
become  arahats - BTW, this is the first case of sudden
enlightment  I'm  aware  of  in Buddhist tradition). So
it's not a surprise that we have something called 'Four
Noble Truths'.

> Also   the  contradictory  views  and  practices  and
> schisms  in  early Buddhism show that there must have
> been quite a lot of debate, which is only possible if
> there isn't an "Old Guy" dictating the rules.

   Yes,  because  the  Old  Guy was death and he didn't
choose  a successor. We also have the Devadatta's case,
but it's clear that he didn't succeed.

> The Buddha specified (if we can go by the canon) that
> some  Vinaya  minor  rules  could be abolished, which
> shows  a  certain  openness  to  debate  about  their
> utility.

   But only after he were death. :-) Old monks and nuns
were  irresponsible  enough to not ask the Old Guy what
the minor rules were.

> There  also is Ananda's influence of allowing more of
> a female point of view in the Sangha etc.

   Well,  that  seems  to me one of the most intriguing
passages  in  early  Buddhism.  Didn't also the Old Guy
make a prophecy about that?

>> But  I'm a stupid postmodern traditionalist, so what
>> do I know?

> Well, that. :-) And you now know you are a chatterbox
> (30 messages Beni, really...)

   Hahaha.   I   prefer   to   think   that  I'm  in  a
intersubjective  thinking  mode,  which  I have come to
appreciate very much in recent times. :-)

   Best wishes,

   Beni