On the website puredhamma.net, the Buddha's teachings are interpreted in quite different ways from "mainstream" theravada. Which arguments do other theravada buddhists use to reject these interpretations?
DISCLAIMER: I'm not mentioning their username, but there is a user who is currently quite active on this sub and is an enthusiastic proponent of the teachings found on puredhamma.net. To this person, and to anyone who shares their views, I have the following to say: I am NOT INTERESTED in any arguments in favor of the interpretation of the Dhamma found on puredhamma.net. I believe the person behind that website is already doing a great job arguing in favor of that interpretation. I also don't reject his views per se, i'm just looking for discussion.
Some context: the person behind puredhamma.net is a student of the venerable Waharaka Thero from Sri Lanka, who passed away in February 2017. Waharaka Thero interpreted certain teachings of the Buddha in ways that are different from those held by other theravada buddhists. See for example his interpretation of the Three Characteristics.
If Waharaka Thero's interpretations of the Dhamma are right, this would mean that all other lineages of theravada buddhism are wrong. That's quite a bold statement, and I would find it difficult to believe that eminent teachers such as Ajahn Mun, Ajahn Chah, Mahasi Sayadaw etc. were all mistaken. So here's my question: what arguments do other theravada buddhists use to argue that their interpretation of the Dhamma is right, and not Waharaka Thero's? I am only interested in arguments relating to the Pali Canon, NOT to the commentaries and texts like the Visuddhimagga.
Apologies if this post sounds too critical of puredhamma.net or Waharaka Thero, and thanks in advance for your replies!
[link] [comments]
from Buddhism https://ift.tt/2CF4C9E
Post a Comment