Are Scriptures Really Needed?

MindGate

In Buddhism, is studying/reading its scriptures (such as the sutras) truly important to the personal practice of Buddhism?

Will it bring you any closer to happiness, enlightenment, or mental calmness?

Does one really need sutras to decide what is good or bad, real or fake? Or should one look inside for the answer?

When debating a concept, does a quotation from a sutra automatically mean that that side of the argument wins because its a teaching from Buddha and all other opinions are just wrong views?

And so on and so forth. You get the gist of it. (And please don't assume what side I'm on.)

Just wondering, thanks!

Daozen

Ultimately, no, scriptures are not needed.

Truth is beyond words, a la the flower sermon.

But words - especially Buddha's - can help us along the way.

compassionate_warrior

When debating a concept, does a quotation from a sutra automatically mean that that side of the argument wins because its a teaching from Buddha and all other opinions are just wrong views?
Just wondering, thanks!

haha! Where have you BEEN, MG? Maybe you haven't been reading the same threads I have. Seems one can find suttric references for either side of some arguments, particularly the biggies that keep repeating themselves here: karma and rebirth. There doesn't seem to be any Last Word, not that I've observed here, anyway.

Lots of people haven't studied the suttras. Some study texts that are said to be derived from the suttras and later commentaries, like the Lamrim, in Tibetan Buddhism. But I'm starting to wonder about the accuracy of some of those "derived" texts. I've learned a lot by reading the debates here, and quoted passages from the suttras. But do you need it? Can you be a good Buddhist without studying the suttras? I think so, but studying texts can enhance your understanding.

That's my opinion.

MindGate

Well, CP, I've never experienced, but I'm assuming something has happened like this:

Man 1: I think Buddha never taught reincarnation.
Man 2: The sutras said he did. "Quote quote quote."
Man 1: That can be interpreted differently, though.
Man 2: Well clearly he still taught it, its in the sutras!

Cloud

There's only sight, sound, bodily sensation, smell, taste and mental formations (feelings, perceptions, thoughts).

So what are the scriptures? Visual stimuli that can lead to right thoughts, which can lead to practice to cultivate the wholesome and drop the unwholesome, which can lead to the mind awakening to its true nature.

The scriptures are useful, teachers are useful, paying attention to life itself is useful. What works for any one person varies!

dorje

@MindGate

Why does your scenario seem so familiar? Seems like one of them is referring to someone we all know on the boards.

compassionate_warrior

"chuckle* *snicker* (@ dorje)

MindGate, my scenario goes like this:

Member A: The Buddha taught rebirth, the suttras say so. Quote, quote, quote.
Member B: The suttras say he didn't believe in rebirth: Quote, quote, quote.

Referee: TIED! Stalemate!

compassionate_warrior

Oh, wait:
Member C: He taught rebirth, but just moment-to-moment within one lifetime. Quote, quote, interpret, interpret. Focus on the present, the past and future are irrelevant.

Jeffrey

Everybody must find their own practice that they choose. Personally I focus on the practices I would trust at the time of my death.

compassionate_warrior

Member It doesn't matter what the Buddha taught; I've had past life recall experiences so I know the reality of rebirth!

Member X: Your past life recall is just thought formations, inadmissible in debate. The Buddha said so. Quote, quote, quote.

Buddhist TV sit-com, anyone?

Jeffrey

[thread locked]
2 days later thread titled "do you have to believe in rebirth"

Disney

Well! if you truly grasped the non-grasping essence of inherent nature. Scripture can help you to truly know whether your knowing of essence of prajna is right :vimp:

DhammaDhatu

In the beginning, no, scriptures are not needed.

Concentration and stream entry is beyond words, a la the flower sermon.

But words - especially Buddha's - are necessary to complete the way.

ShiftPlusOne

I see what's taught in scriptures as shortcuts, guides or clues. They also help to put the four noble truths into perspective. They're things you can quite easily figure out yourself, but sometimes you need a nudge in the right direction.

genkaku

A (wo)man uses a map to drive from here to there. But it's the driving that counts: If all you can do is keep staring at the map, you're bound to run off the road.

DairyLama

In Buddhism, is studying/reading its scriptures (such as the sutras) truly important to the personal practice of Buddhism?

Yes. Because the suttas provide detailed guidance on the practice that we do. And because without studying the suttas we are completely dependent on the subjective opinions of others.

P

DairyLama

A (wo)man uses a map to drive from here to there. But it's the driving that counts: If all you can do is keep staring at the map, you're bound to run off the road.

But if you're a man and decide you don't really need a map (!) then you'll just get lost and go round in circles, probably asking for directions from other equally lost drivers and getting completely confused. ;-)

P

DairyLama

Can you be a good Buddhist without studying the suttras?

Yes of course. Providing you have a teacher who HAS studied the suttas / sutras.

P

dorje

But if you're a man and decide you don't really need a map (!) then you'll just get lost and go round in circles, probably asking for directions from other equally lost drivers and getting completely confused. ;-)

P

Guys use GPS systems nowadays.

But in all seriousness, Suttas and their commentaries are basically a map. You can choose to take the shortest road between point A to point B, or you can explore every part of the map before reaching your destination. But to keep on quoting the texts to justify your direction is basically stupid, since everyone has their own interpretation of the map.

DairyLama

Member A: The Buddha taught rebirth, the suttras say so. Quote, quote, quote.
Member B: The suttras say he didn't believe in rebirth: Quote, quote, quote.

Referee: TIED! Stalemate!

Yep, it all gets very competitive.;-) You can either just watch this sport or play it yourself and sprain a few muscles ;-).

P

DairyLama

But to keep on quoting the texts to justify your direction is basically stupid, since everyone has their own interpretation of the map.

Yes, there are different routes to get from A to B. But we do need the map. Or to put it another way, if somebody has kindly given us a detailed map and we choose to ignore it, aren't we being somewhat silly?

P

fivebells

...without studying the suttas we are completely dependent on the subjective opinions of others.

Whereas by abdicating our responsibility for our personal beliefs to "the sutras told me so," we make ourselves completely dependent on the subjective opinions of the authors of the sutras...

GuyC

Member Z: I am convinced that the Buddha taught rebirth, but I am equally convinced that I would be unable to convince those who are convinced he didn't teach rebirth to change their minds...therefore, I am convinced that rebirth debate threads are largely a waste of time.

hermitwin

What is Buddhism? It is what Buddha taught. Scriptures (sutta) are the closest thing we have of what Buddha taught.
There are many different paths to take in life. But if you want to follow Buddha's way, shouldn't you at least try to find out what he said?
Otherwise, dont call it Buddhism and dont call yourself a Buddhist. There are a million other terms you can use to call what you are practising.

SherabDorje

Otherwise, dont call it Buddhism and dont call yourself a Buddhist. There are a million other terms you can use to call what you are practising.

Seconded.

DairyLama

...without studying the suttas we are completely dependent on the subjective opinions of others.

Whereas by abdicating our responsibility for our personal beliefs to "the sutras told me so," we make ourselves completely dependent on the subjective opinions of the authors of the sutras...

It isn't about abdicating responsibility. It's about trying to find out what the Buddha taught. And the suttas are a reliable guide to this.

P

DairyLama

...therefore, I am convinced that rebirth debate threads are largely a waste of time.

They are useful in motivating people to go and read what the suttas actually say.

P

fivebells

It isn't about abdicating responsibility. It's about trying to find out what the Buddha taught. And the suttas are a reliable guide to this.

Even ignoring your dogmatic assumption that the sutras constitute a reliable guide to the Buddha's teachings, you're still back to "completely dependent on the subjective opinions of the authors of the sutras..."

DairyLama

It isn't about abdicating responsibility. It's about trying to find out what the Buddha taught. And the suttas are a reliable guide to this.

Even ignoring your dogmatic assumption that the sutras constitute a reliable guide to the Buddha's teachings, you're still back to "completely dependent on the subjective opinions of the authors of the sutras..."

If you don't accept the suttas as a reliable guide, then what DO you accept?

P

Jeffrey

Theres sutrayana. But there are also other yanas. A yogi doesn't read sutras. Buddha didn't read sutras.

SherabDorje

Theres sutrayana. But there are also other yanas. A yogi doesn't read sutras.

But under those circumstances, can you call it Buddhism? If there was not at least a basis in the sutras, there would be no Buddhism. We at least have to depend on teachers who know the sutras, or we can't call it Buddhism.

Jeffrey

Do you call Buddhas practice Buddhism? Perhaps not haha.
http://www.dharmaling.org/en/videos/46-video-sutrayana-and-tantrayana

compassionate_warrior

Do you call Buddhas practice Buddhism? Perhaps not haha.

Zing! Score 1 for Jeffrey!

if you want to follow Buddha's way, shouldn't you at least try to find out what he said?
Otherwise, dont call it Buddhism and dont call yourself a Buddhist. There are a million other terms you can use to call what you are practising.

I've noticed over my several months here that there are members who base their practice on the 4 Noble Truths, the 8fold Path, the precepts, mindfulness, emptiness,meditation, without studying the suttras. They consider themselves Buddhists. Are these not the Buddha's fundamental teachings? If I'm not mistaken, even one of our new mods practices in this way. If followers of the 4 Nobles and the 8fold Path & precepts aren't Buddhists, what are they? Would our admins. have hired a mod who wasn't a Buddhist?

SherabDorje

Good point.

Jeffrey

However deep your
Knowledge of the scriptures,
It is no more than a strand of hair
In the vastness of space;
However important appears
Your worldly experience,
It is but a drop of water in a deep ravine.

Tokusan

Talisman

The pratyekabuddha does not rely upon, come into contact with, or teach any of the sutras. They attain enlightenment in solitude and acheive nirvana by merit of their karma and personal insight.

The Samyaksambuddha, the final stage of the Boddhisattva path, also does not rely upon the teachings of a previously enlightened being or the direct trasmission of the dharma by another Samyaksambuddha for acheiving nirvana, but instead attain perfective enlightenment by merit of effort, compassion, and wisdom developed over an infinite number of lives. As apposed to the Pratyekabuddha, this form of Buddha has the skillful means necessary for teaching others, fostering a new sangha, and turning the wheel of Dharma in a world where the Dharma has been lost or never preached.

The Sravaka path, the disciples of a Samkyaksambuddha, DO rely upon the teachings and sutras of a living or recently manifest Smayaksambuddha such as Shakyamuni. They are able to teach as well, and are considered Arhats, awoken, and enlightened.

Dakini

My, my-- people really had fun here last night! And some accuse us of taking ourselves too seriously on these boards! ^_^

It's about trying to find out what the Buddha taught. And the suttas are a reliable guide to this.

A reliable guide? You mean, the part where it says he taught rebirth, or the part where he taught no rebirth? The part where he taught that karma applies to the current lifetime only, or the part where he details how karma manifests in future lives? Study of suttras just leads to confusion--such is my impression after participating in this forum. It's fascinating, but confusing. Though there are suttras, I'm sure, where the teachings are clearer, say, where mindfulness, compassion and other basics are taught. That can be useful.

If you don't accept the suttas as a reliable guide, then what DO you accept?

Texts derived from the suttras and commentaries, as in some Mahayana schools. If you adopt TB or Zen (or, I assume, Ch'an), the suttras come predigested, as part of the package. Or you can read contemporary books on Buddhist topics and teachings.

DhammaDhatu

Study of the suttas leads to clarity.

MN 117 has been cited on this forum countless times.

It is the key to understanding the suttas.

In Theravada countries, the distinction between lokiya (mundane) and lokuttara/paramatha (supramundane) dhamma is overt. This distinction is so straightforward & basic.

If we cannot let go of our allegience to our gurus, we will struggle to investigate new perspectives because our "tea cup is full" with no room to allow anything new in.

Old dogs can't learn new tricks.

Best wishes

DD

Dakini

Study of the suttas leads to clarity.

In Theravada countries, the distinction between lokiya (mundane) and lokuttara/paramatha (supramundane) dhamma is overt. This distinction is so straightforward & basic.

I asked this on another thread: where are the teachings on the supramundane? I was told they don't exist.

Lots of people trust their gurus. That's kinda what they're for, at least in some traditions. Though it's true, the Buddha said to test everything before accepting. The gurus encourage that, but they have an answer for everything. As Stephen Batchelor discovered, you're allowed to question only up to a point. You're expected to come to a predetermined conclusion, in accordance with the beliefs of the school you've chosen. That's why he set up his own path.

Dazzle

Study of the suttas leads to clarity.

MN 117 has been cited on this forum countless times.

It is the key to understanding the suttas.

In Theravada countries, the distinction between lokiya (mundane) and lokuttara/paramatha (supramundane) dhamma is overt. This distinction is so straightforward & basic.

If we cannot let go of our allegience to our gurus, we will struggle to investigate new perspectives because our "tea cup is full" with no room to allow anything new in.

Old dogs can't learn new tricks.

Best wishes

DD

Well said DD. After finally letting go of gurus offline, reading the suttas brought me a great deal of renewed inspiration and clarity.

/\

Dakini

After finally letting go of gurus offline, reading the suttas brought me a great deal of renewed inspiration and clarity.

Right, but when someone does just that, and finds that some of the teacher's teachings conflict with some of the suttric source material, like Batchelor did, and forges a path according to their own understanding of the suttras, they become very controversial and are condemned by some. so...what to do? :-/ Just ignore everyone and do what ya gotta do? Follow your own analysis and path?

Jeffrey

Just drink the tea in your cup. There is always more to put into it. If you become thirsty again.

Dakini

Just drink the tea in your cup. There is always more to put into it. If you become thirsty again.

But where does the tea I put in my cup come from? Is it Tibetan tea, or Japanese or Chinese tea, or Ceylon tea? Or some tea leaves I grew and dried myself?

Jeffrey

If you don't know then you don't know. I just read a zen poetry that said that the origin of phenomenon is the present. I think that is from one perspective or truth. And then another truth is that everything is interconnected. You would have to be a buddha to see all the connections. But you don't need to be a buddha and you just have to deal with what you see. You can drink coffee too.

Dazzle

After finally letting go of gurus offline, reading the suttas brought me a great deal of renewed inspiration and clarity.

Right, but when someone does just that, and finds that some of the teacher's teachings conflict with some of the suttric source material, like Batchelor did, and forges a path according to their own understanding of the suttras, they become very controversial and are condemned by some. so...what to do? :-/ Just ignore everyone and do what ya gotta do? Follow your own analysis and path?

One only becomes controversial if one courts publicity,and writes books, lol!

Practising dharma isn't about what other people think, nor about being intimidated by them.

Dakini

Practising dharma isn't about what other people think, nor about being intimidated by them.

This is what Cloud said to me on another thread. Thanks.

Dakini

If you don't know then you don't know. I just read a zen poetry that said that the origin of phenomenon is the present. I think that is from one perspective or truth. And then another truth is that everything is interconnected. You would have to be a buddha to see all the connections. But you don't need to be a buddha and you just have to deal with what you see. You can drink coffee too.

But I mean, I'm the one who chooses the tea, so that's an important part of it. I determine the nature of what's in the cup I'm drinking.

Jeffrey

I think what happens is that you see the connections. But you can have a projection of what you think the nature is. You open and then insight comes about what is in the cup. But only a buddha opens totally.

fivebells

But under those circumstances, can you call it Buddhism?

Why do you care what it's called? This is a path to awakening, not an exclusive boy's club with secret handshakes.

fivebells

If you don't accept the suttas as a reliable guide, then what DO you accept?

Personal experience based on experimentation. (Experimentation ultimately derived from the sutras, to a large extent, but also from other sources.)

Jeffrey

Julia Child's. Julia Child's Cookbook. Julia Child's inspired cook