What the Buddha Taught / Walpola Rahula

limbo · January 2010

Hey All,

I've been looking for a solid introduction text to Buddhism in general; Hopefully, something that can serve as a stepping stone to deeper study. I've seen Walpola Rahula's book referenced here and in a couple other places and it seems like a good start. However, looking at the reviews on amazon it seems like the author has hit some major point of disagreement with his claim that the Buddha denied the soul. (see some of those reviews here: http://www.amazon.com/What-Buddha-Taught-Expanded-Dhammapada/product-reviews/0802130313/ref=cm_cr_pr_hist_1?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&filterBy=addOneStar)

Couple of questions:
1. if you've read this book, is it any good? should one get it as a intro to buddhism or do you have any other recommendations?

2. i'm pretty new to (what seems to me) like a sectarian debate over a single point of the teachings, can anyone explain what the disagreement is about and who the opposing factions are?

Thanks!

Stephen · January 2010

Books are good, but they're often from one person's perspective. What is very beneficial is following self-study, so that you can get the basics and only delve into the deeper meaning of each lesson when you feel ready. There are a couple of websites that are good for this, such as BuddhaNet.net and AccessToInsight.org, where you can choose which types of teachings you want to learn and go from there.

I've probably read six or eight different books on Buddhism, but they all just tended to reinforce what I first learned through internet self-study and none of them stood out as being a perfect, standalone foundation for the teachings.

Also some audio courses are helpful. For instance, on one of those sites is a set of MP3 files from the Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi that are, I believe, a verbal reading of a book he may have written. Though the book is out there also, I'm sure, auditory learning has proven to be more effective in some than visual learning.

Good luck in your quest.

NamelessRiver · January 2010

1. if you've read this book, is it any good? should one get it as a intro to buddhism or do you have any other recommendations?

I like Thich Nhat Hanh's The Heart of The Buddha's Teachings. He explain things pretty directly but in a very personal way.

2. i'm pretty new to (what seems to me) like a sectarian debate over a single point of the teachings, can anyone explain what the disagreement is about and who the opposing factions are?

You will see many people twisting their pants over the Pali Canon, but here is what a Theravada monk says on this matter:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notself.html

In brief, he sums it up:

The one passage where the Buddha is asked point-blank to take a position on the ontological question of whether or not there is a self, he refuses to answer.
The passages which state most categorically that there is no self are qualified in such a way that they cover all of describable reality, but not all of reality which may be experienced.
Views that there is no self are ranked with views that that there is a self as a "fetter of views" which a person aiming at release from suffering would do well to avoid.
The person who has attained the goal of release views reality in such a way that all views — even such basic notions as self & no-self, true & false — can have no hold power over the mind.

BrotherBob · January 2010

I agree with Namelessriver and recommend Thich Nhat Hanh's 'The Heart of the Buddha's Teachings.'

I used, and still use, that book as a reference while exploring many many teachings from other sources over many years. When confused about what others might be getting at, I usually turn to that resource for a clear explanation.

Not all Dharmacharya in TNH tradition recommend beginners studying this text because it's considered pretty advanced stuff. As a matter of fact, I'm currently working with a group of Thich Nhat Hanh lineage, Order of Interbeing, aspirants who are using this book in a fourteen month, what we call a Buddha 501, course of study while regular sangha members are studying 'Happiness' by Thich Nhat Hanh. Also,

here are the links for Thich Nhat Hanh stuff:

Plum Village: http://www.plumvillage.org/
Deer Park: http://www.deerparkmonastery.org/

I also enjoy all of what Venerable Thubten Chodron has to say about Buddhadharma either in books, videos, or audio forms. She is a good speaker with great insight into the subject from a western point of view and, like Thich Nhat Hanh, is committed to making the Dharma understandable in western terms.

http://www.sravastiabbey.org/

http://www.thubtenchodron.org/

:):)

BrotherBob · January 2010

:):)

Valtiel · January 2010

You can read quite a bit of it online for free to get an idea: http://books.google.com/books?id=_WduwVbiLSsC&dq=What+the+Buddha+Taught&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=wHxfS9uJHdOWtgfSqvjxCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=&f=false

2. i'm pretty new to (what seems to me) like a sectarian debate over a single point of the teachings, can anyone explain what the disagreement is about and who the opposing factions are?

Well, there's lots of different schools of Buddhism. So, naturally, there's opposing views. What specifically are you referring to?

Stephen · January 2010

limbo wrote: »

2. i'm pretty new to (what seems to me) like a sectarian debate over a single point of the teachings, can anyone explain what the disagreement is about and who the opposing factions are?

There were a few councils held after the Buddha's passing, and an eventual schism occurred resulting in two branches of Buddhism, Theravada (School of the Elders) and Mahayana (Greater Vehicle).

They're both correct, when you boil it all down, but Mahayana traditions ask one to take a vow to put off the attainment of Nibbana with the aspiration of continuing to help others along the path.

Honestly I don't think it's necessary to take a vow. Those who realize the truth will help others regardless. Attainment of Nibbana does not prevent one from helping, and if it's meant to keep you in the cycle of Samsara to help others... well... not even the Buddha did that. Perhaps he understood rebirth in a supra-mundane way that the doctrine can not satisfactorily explain. He didn't ask his adherents to not reach Nibbana.

In any case, they still both contain the full teachings of Siddhattha Gotama. I'm sure there's information available on various websites.

NamelessRiver · January 2010

o0Mundus-Vult-Decipi0o wrote: »

Well, there's lots of different schools of Buddhism. So, naturally, there's opposing views. What specifically are you referring to?

Anatta as meaning that no soul exists.

BrotherBob · January 2010

What connects one life with the next ? Is there a soul, atman, self, or real personality that goes from one life to another ?

Our mind has gross and subtle levels. The sense consciousnesses that see, hear, smell, taste, and tactile sensations, and the gross mental consciousness, which is busy thinking this and that, actively function while we are alive. At the time of death, they cease to function and absorb into the subtle, and finally extremely subtle, mental consciousness. This extremely subtle mind bears the imprints of our actions (karma). After death, the continuity of the subtle mind, which is neither static nor an independent entity, leaves one body, enters the intermediate state, and then takes rebirth in another body. After the subtle mind joins with another body body at the moment of conception, the gross sense consciousnesses and the gross mental consciousnesses reappear, and the person again sees, hears, thinks, and so forth. This extremely subtle mind, which goes from one life to the next, is a constantly changing dependent phenomenon. For this reason, it is not considered to be a soul, atman, self, or real personality. Thus the Buddha taught the doctrine of selflessness - that there is no solid, independent, findable thing that can be isolated as a person. http://www.wisdom-books.com/ProductExtract.asp?PID=9409

RenGalskap · January 2010

limbo wrote: »

Couple of questions:
1. if you've read this book, is it any good? should one get it as a intro to buddhism or do you have any other recommendations?

It's an excellent book. Rahula Walpola comes from the Theravada tradition of scholar/monks. The book was published several decades ago and is still in print.

A more recent book, from another Theravada scholar/monk who is one of our leading Pali translators is "In the Buddha's Words", by Bhikkhu Bodhi.

limbo wrote: »

2. i'm pretty new to (what seems to me) like a sectarian debate over a single point of the teachings, can anyone explain what the disagreement is about and who the opposing factions are?

The majority of Buddhists subscribe to the Abhidharmic view that there is no atman. Rahula Walpola was one of these. A smaller number of us take the view expressed in the Suttas, which Nameless River has already posted. We say that no atman can be found, without taking a position on whether one exists.

There have always been a small number of Buddhists who feel that the Buddha taught that there is a self. They are not a specific school. There's a small split off group of Theravadins in Thailand who believe there is an atman. There are Tibetan Buddhists who believe in an atman. The earliest parts of the Nirvana Sutra were obviously written by a Buddhist or group of Buddhists who believed in an atman. These are just some examples.

The majority of the people in the last group practice and study sincerely. Unfortunately, a very small number of them seem to be more interested in practicing belligerence, mistranslating suttas, and disrupting discussions than practicing Buddhism.

Regardless of which of the three groups you belong to, you will agree than form is not self, thoughts are not self, the body is not self, etc. In other words, you can't identify something that is self.

pegembara · January 2010

Here is a mother lode of books mostly Theravadan.

http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/

limbo · January 2010

Thanks guys for all your input, this is very helpful!

The heart of the Buddha's teachings is next on my reading list and based on what I hear from you all, i'll probably follow it up with what the Buddha taught. I figure that will give me a good grounding and insight from both the tibetan and Theravadan views.

thanks for explaining the conflict regarding existence of the soul Ren, and Brother Bob. I'm starting to get an appreciation of just how many different sects and opinions there are in Buddhism. My mind keeps going back to The Name of the Rose where they all gather to debate the question whether Jesus did or did not own the clothes he wore... but that's just me

MatSalted · January 2010

limbo wrote: »

Thanks guys for all your input, this is very helpful!

The heart of the Buddha's teachings is next on my reading list and based on what I hear from you all, i'll probably follow it up with what the Buddha taught. I figure that will give me a good grounding and insight from both the tibetan and Theravadan views.

thanks for explaining the conflict regarding existence of the soul Ren, and Brother Bob. I'm starting to get an appreciation of just how many different sects and opinions there are in Buddhism. My mind keeps going back to The Name of the Rose where they all gather to debate the question whether Jesus did or did not own the clothes he wore... but that's just me

What The Buddha Taught is a great little book and from the Therevadan Tradition which is closer to the original teachings and less esoteric.

I recommend you get both:)

Some good books here too:

http://www.buddhanet.net/library.htm

Mat

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

What the Buddha Taught / Walpola Rahula

Comments