//honeypot demagogic

 Forum DhammaCitta. Forum Diskusi Buddhis Indonesia

Author Topic: Sutta dongeng???  (Read 24928 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Sutta dongeng???
« on: 24 February 2010, 10:49:56 PM »
Ketika membaca Digha Nikaya lengkap terbitan DC yg dlengkapi dg catatan kaki,saat melihat cat.kaki pd Agganna Sutta & Cakkavatti-sihanada Sutta yg isiny bhw kedua sutta ini mnrt RD (Rhys Davis,seorg penulis/peneliti Buddhis) adl berisi perumpamaan/legenda/dongeng yg dbuat utk menyindir sistem kasta d India (pd Agganna Sutta) atau utk memperlihatkan pentingny hukum/norma (pd Cakkavatti-sihanada Sutta).

Jd,apakah kisah kemunculan manusia menurut Agganna Sutta & kisah penurunan & kenaikan usia manusia sampai kemunculan Metteya mnrt Cakkavatti hny dongeng/kisah rekaan yg dbuat Sang Buddha (atau penyusun sutta2 ini)? Mohon penjelasan dr para ahli sutta d sini. Thx
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #1 on: 24 February 2010, 10:55:55 PM »
kalau anda perhatikan kata 'dongeng' di buku itu tertulis dalam tanda petik. yg menandakan bahwa ini adalah bukan makna sesungguhnya, yg dalam versi english tertulis 'Fairy-tales' (juga dalam tanda petik), dan memang dalam sutta itu Sang Buddha menceritakan suatu kisah yg terjadi pada masa lampau dan masa depan  yg tak terhingga lamanya, jadi menurut bahasa awam kita bisa disebut 'dongeng' karena mustahil dibuktikan.

ini hanyalah gaya bahasa penulis
« Last Edit: 24 February 2010, 11:06:44 PM by Indra »

Offline Sunkmanitu Tanka Ob'waci

  • Sebelumnya: Karuna, Wolverine, gachapin
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 5.806
  • Reputasi: 239
  • Gender: Male
  • 会いたい。
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #2 on: 24 February 2010, 11:30:11 PM »
selain itu para scholar sering mengartikan kejadian yang di luar pemahaman ilmu pengetahuan manusia biasa sebagai perumpamaan. hal ini lazim, terutama pada scholar-scholar modern awal seperti mr. rhys.

tentu saja, untuk saat ini kita tidak bisa membuktikan kebenaran Aganna Sutta, tetapi hal yang sama terjadi pula pada Ajaran Sang Buddha yang lain seperti tumimbal lahir, yang belum bisa dibuktikan secara ilmu pengetahuan biasa.
« Last Edit: 24 February 2010, 11:31:47 PM by gachapin »
HANYA MENERIMA UCAPAN TERIMA KASIH DALAM BENTUK GRP
Fake friends are like shadows never around on your darkest days

Offline dhammasiri

  • Sahabat
  • ***
  • Posts: 465
  • Reputasi: 44
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #3 on: 25 February 2010, 12:23:08 AM »
Ada sebuah artikle yang sangat bagus tentang Dīgha Nikāya oleh Prof. Oliver Abeynayaka. Artikle itu dimuat dalam Journal Kalyani, terbitan Universitas Kelaniya. Sejauh ini, ini adalah artikle terbaik tentang DN yang pernah saya baca. Dalam analyisnya, beliau melihat bahwa setiap vagga mempunyai keunikan tersendiri, yang dapat dipergunakan sebagai cara untuk melihat tingkat kemahiran Sang Buddha dalam membabarkan Dhamma dan juga keahlian murid-Nya dalam menyusun sutta-sutta dalam DN. Menurut beliau, vagga pertama (sutta 1-13) mengandung unsur yang paling klasik. Vagga ini didahului oleh Brahmajālasutta, yang isinya adalah untuk mengkritik ajaran-ajaran yang ada saat itu. Kritik tanpa sebuah solusi adalah menghancurkan. Karena itu, dalam sutta kedua, Samaññaphalasutta, di bagian awalnya tetap dipergunakan untuk mengkritik ajaran-ajaran agama lain yang ada saat itu. Di sesi selanjutnya, kita bisa melihat bagaimana konstruksi masyarakat Buddhist yang dibangun oleh Sang Buddha. Dalam hal ini, Sang Buddha tidak hanya mengkritik ajaran-ajaran yang ada tetapi Beliau juga memberikan solusi yang nyata dengan cara membangun masyarakat Buddhist. Hampir seluruh vagga ini, mengandung nilai filsafat yang lebih tinggi, bahasanya klasik. Selain itu, sangat sedikit unsur populernya atau boleh dikatakan sebagai unsur mitologi. Konsep Tuhan dikritik sepenuhnya, kepercayaan populer masih sulit ditemukan dalam vagga ini. Akan tetapi dalam vagga kedua, telah terjadi evolusi. Bahasanya boleh dibilang moderat, dalam arti tidak lagi seklasik vagga pertama. Unsur-unsur populer atau mitologi sudah dimasukkan. Lihat saja, Janavasabhasutta, Mahasamayasutta dan yang lainnya. Dalam Vagga ketiga, gaya bahasanya sudah lebih modern bila dibandingkan dengan vagga-vagga sebelumnya. Unsur-unsur populer pun dapat dilihat lebih jelas.
Apakah semua itu sekedar mitologi atau dengeng belaka? Kalau kita mau jeli, sebenarnya vagga pertama dipergunakan sebagai cara untuk mempresentasikan usaha Sang Buddha dalam mendirikan ajaran baru sebagai wujud ketidakpuasan-Nya terhadap agama yang ada. Karena itu, pada awalnya dia harus berdebat dengan tokoh-tokoh agama terkemuka saat itu. Singkatnya, beliau harus berhadapan dengan orang-orang elit. Karena itu, filsafat tingkat tinggi harus dipergunakan. Setelah Sang Buddha sukses menundukkan orang-orang elit, banyak juga orang-orang dari kelas menengah menjadi murid Sang Buddha. Orang-orang dari kelas menengah tidak mampu mencerna ajaran yang tinggi sehingga ajaran semi populer harus diberikan. Pada tahap ketiga, masyarakat dari grass-root level menjadi murid Sang Buddha. Mereka ini tidak mungkin dijejali dengan filsafat. Karena itu, ajaran populer perlu diberikan. Dalam hal ini, dongen diperlukan agar orang-orang yang tidak memiliki pendidikan tinggi dibutuhkan sehingga mereka mampu menyerap ajaran Sang Buddha.
Dari sisi Buddhologi, kita juga bisa melihat bahwa dalam vagga pertama, Sang Buddha digambarkan sebagai natural human being. Tidak ada penjelasan bahwa beliau memiliki 32 tanda mahapurisa. Kalau pun ada itu hanya dalam Ambattasutta. Dalam vagga selanjutnya, Sang Buddha mulai digambarkan memiliki 32 tanda mahapurisa dan detail tentang mahapurisa ditemukan dalam vagga ketiga.
Kesimpulannya, Sang Buddha adalah orang yang pandai dalam mengajar. Saat berhadapan dengan orang yang pandai beliau akan berbicara secara filosofis, namun saat berhadapan dengan orang-orang yang berpendidikan rendah, perlu juga menggunakan hal-hal yang populer di masyarakat agar ajaran-Nya lebih mudah dipahami oleh pendengar-Nya.
1. Apakah cerita tentang kemunculan manusia dalam Agaññasutta hanya sebuah dongeng? Secara pribadi saya melihat sutta ini dipergunakan sebagai penjabaran lebih luas dan merupakan kelanjutan dari Brahmajalasutta. Dalam Brahmajalasutta dijelaskan bahwa telah terjadi kesalahan persepsi tentang adanya Maha Brahma sebagai Sang Pencipta. Agaññasutta memberikan penjelasan lebih luas tentang evolusi manusia di bumi ini. Apakah ini sekedar dongeng? Saya melihatnya bukan sebagai dongen melainkan sebagai sebuah teori tentang evolusi kehidupan manusia di bumi ini yang dikemukakan oleh Sang Buddha. Ini tidak ada bedanya dengan theori yang diungkapkan oleh para ilmuwan modern. Ambil contohnya big bang. Apakah itu adalah sebuah dongen? Tidak, tetapi merupakan theori.
2. Apakah penurunan dan kenaikan usia dalam Cakkavattisihanadasutta juga sekedar dongeng? Cakkavattisihanadasutta adalah sebuah sutta yang dipergunakan untuk menggambarkan kondisi politik dengan nilai-nilai moral. Kalau dalam Aggaññasutta, kita bisa melihat bagaimana hubungan moral dengan ekonomi, dalam sutta ini kita bisa melihat implementasi ethik dalam dunia politik dalam Cakkavattisihanadasutta. Apabila nilai-nilai moral diimplementasikan dalam politik, hal itu akan mempengaruhi kesejahteraan masyarakat. Saat masyarakat hidup dengan kesejahteraan yang tinggi, usia panjang dapat diharapkan. Alam akan lebih bersahabat. Tetapi, saat manusia tidak lagi beretika, dunia ini akan cepat hancur, manusia berusia pendek dan alam pun sulit diajak bersahabat. Lihat saja sekarang ini, karena umumnya manusia digerogoti oleh nafsu keserakahan, alam pun sulit diajak berkompromi, pemanasan global terjadi. Usia manusia semakin pendek. Dan, masih banyak lagi yang bisa kita lihat sekarang ini.
Semoga jawaban ini membantu meringankan keragu-raguan Seniya.
Kedamaian dunia tidak akan tercapai bila batin kita tidak damai

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #4 on: 25 February 2010, 01:34:51 AM »
 [at]  Dhammasiri,

akan tetapi, organisasi vagga2 tersebut kan hanya dalam susunan Tipitaka bukan menggambarkan urutan sebenarnya secara kronologis.

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #5 on: 25 February 2010, 12:45:01 PM »
 [at] dhammasiri:
Thx atas penjelasanny yg cukup jelas & dpt dterina dg baik.

 [at] indra:
Memang susunan dlm Digha nikaya tdk menunjukkan urutan kronologis,ttp menunjukkan pengelompokan atas sutta2 yg memiliki pokok pikiran sejenis spt yg djelaskan sdr. Dhammasiri.
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline dhammasiri

  • Sahabat
  • ***
  • Posts: 465
  • Reputasi: 44
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #6 on: 25 February 2010, 10:59:55 PM »
 [at]  Indra: Benar tidak ada pengelompokan secara kronologis karena kalau diurutkan secara kronologis Mahaparinibbānasutta mesti ditaruh di bagian terakhir. Tetapi, apa yang saya jelaskan adalah vagga tersebut memberikan indikasi bahwa ada semacam urutan dari yang plaing awal hinggal belakangan.
Kedamaian dunia tidak akan tercapai bila batin kita tidak damai

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #7 on: 25 February 2010, 11:03:01 PM »
[at]  Indra: Benar tidak ada pengelompokan secara kronologis karena kalau diurutkan secara kronologis Mahaparinibbānasutta mesti ditaruh di bagian terakhir. Tetapi, apa yang saya jelaskan adalah vagga tersebut memberikan indikasi bahwa ada semacam urutan dari yang plaing awal hinggal belakangan.

setuju, hanya yg saya maksudkan adalah bahwa susunan DN yg seperti itu bukanlah direncanakan oleh Sang Buddha.

Offline dhammasiri

  • Sahabat
  • ***
  • Posts: 465
  • Reputasi: 44
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #8 on: 25 February 2010, 11:43:33 PM »
 [at]  Indra: Sang Buddha mungkin malah tidak tahu apa itu DN karena DN disusun oleh murid-murid Sang Buddha setelah Sang Buddha wafat.
Kedamaian dunia tidak akan tercapai bila batin kita tidak damai

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #9 on: 26 February 2010, 07:31:10 AM »
O ya,mengenai susunan DN,aliran Theravada menempatkan Brahmajala Sutta sbg sutta pertama,namun aliran lain yg berbasis kitab Agama yg sejenis (kalau tdk salah Sarvastivada) Dirgha Agama nya bkn Brahmajala Sutta yg pertama. Jd,sptny susunan kitab DN bkn dtentukan pd Konsili Pertama (kalau pun sudah dtentukan tp blm final),namun mgkn ms2 sesudah perpecahan sektarian.
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline dhammasiri

  • Sahabat
  • ***
  • Posts: 465
  • Reputasi: 44
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #10 on: 26 February 2010, 08:09:56 AM »
Dirgagama menempatkan Mahāpadana dan Mahāparinibbana diurutan pertama. Sementara dalam Digha Nikāya Brahmajalasutta dan Samaññaphalasutta diletakkan diurutan pertama.
« Last Edit: 26 February 2010, 08:12:40 AM by dhammasiri »
Kedamaian dunia tidak akan tercapai bila batin kita tidak damai

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #11 on: 28 February 2010, 11:23:08 AM »
 [at] Ven. Dhammasiri

Ada beberapa pertanyaan yang mungkin Samanera Dhammasiri bisa memberikan penjelasan lebih lanjut supaya kita2 ini lebih jelas.

1. Dikatakan bahwa Vagga pertama bahasanya sangat klasik, vagga kedua moderat / tidak begitu klasik, vagga ketiga tidak klasik. Bagaimana kita membedakan mereka? Bisakah memberikan beberapa contoh?

2. Jika kita menganalisa uraian anda, kita mendapatkan bahwa vagga pertama dibabarkan Sang Buddha dalam usahanya untuk meyakinkan kaum elit mengenai kebenaran ajran Sang BUddha dan kesalahan ajaran mereka melalui filsafat tinggi ajaran beliau; vagga kedua karena dikatakn berisi ajaran semi populer diajarkan untuk menundukkan orang2 kelas menengah, sedangkn vagga ketiga untuk mereka yang berada di grass-root level. Namun jika kita melihat keseluruhan sutta di Nikaya ini, ada sedikit perbedaan pandangan dari apa yang dianalisa di atas. Sebagai contoh, dalam Vagga kedua, banyak sutta2 yang memiliki filsafat sangat tinggi dan pendengarnya juga dari kaum elit.  Contohnya, Mahāsatipaṭṭhānasutta dikatakn diajarkan kepada orang2 Kuru karena orang2 ini memiliki tingkat intelektual yang jauh lebih tinggi dari orang2 biasa, Pāyāsisutta juga merupakan khotbah Bhikkhu Kumarakassapa kepada Pangeran Pāyāsi yang juga berasal dari kaum elit yang juga dipercaya memiliki filsafat agama yang tinggi saat itu. Tidak dipungkiri bahwa Mahāpādanasutta, salah satu sutta di vagga kedua ini, juga memiliki filsafat yang sangat tinggi dan bahkan bisa benar2 direalisasi oleh mereka para sotapanna saja (Lol). Mungkin ada penjelasan kenapa Sutta2 ini dimasukkan di vagga ini? Sementara itu, jika Vagga ketiga diajarkan untuk mereka yang berada pada gross-root level, Agaññāsutta sendiri diajarkan kepada dua bhikkhu yang mulanya adalh brahmana yang sudah sempurna dan ahli dalam kitab Veda. Juga tanpa diragukan bahwa Sampasādanīyasutta dalam vagga ini berisi doktrin yang sangat tinggi yang tidak mudah dimengerti bahkn oleh kaum elit sekalipun, let alone grass-root level! Adakah penjelasan mengapa sutta2 ini juga ditaruh di vagga ini?

Klasifikasi ajaran2 Sang Buddha ke dalam Tipitaka disusun pada Konsili Agung Pertama yang terjadi 3 bulan setelah Sang Buddha Parinibbāna. Kita tidak tahu secara persis apakah klasifikasi ini khususnya Dighanikāya dilakukan semata-mata karena alasan2 bahasa, atau usaha2 Sang Buddha dalam mengajarkan ke orang2 elit, middle class atau grass-root level people. Sayangnya 500 arahat yang mengklasifikasi 34 sutta di Dighanikaya ke dalam tiga vagga ini tidak memberikan alasan. Buddhist commentator hanya mengatakan bahwa penyusunan sutta2 ke dalam Dighanikāya bertujuan untuk memperteguh keyakinan (saddhāvahaguṇa). Ini dibedakan dengan nikaya2 lain seperti contoh Majjhimanikāya yaitu paravādamathana - untuk menhancurkan pandangan2 lain, Saṃyuttanikāya yaiut ñāṇappabhedajanana - untuk memberikan division of various knowledges, dst. Namun demikian, yang jelas kita tahu bahwa dari nama2 vagga yang ada di Didhanikāya, vagga pertama sesuai dengan namanya "silakkhandhavagga' disusun demikian karena semua sutta di vagga ini berisi tiga level moralitas. Vagga kedua sesuai dengan namanya 'Mahavagga' disusun karena banyak nama sutta di sini diawali dengan nama 'mahā' menunjukkn besarnya sutta2 ini. Sementara itu, vagga ketiga bernama Pathikavagga karena sutta pertama dari vagga ini bernama Pathikavagga.

Mettacittena.

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #12 on: 28 February 2010, 11:31:51 AM »
O ya,mengenai susunan DN,aliran Theravada menempatkan Brahmajala Sutta sbg sutta pertama,namun aliran lain yg berbasis kitab Agama yg sejenis (kalau tdk salah Sarvastivada) Dirgha Agama nya bkn Brahmajala Sutta yg pertama. Jd,sptny susunan kitab DN bkn dtentukan pd Konsili Pertama (kalau pun sudah dtentukan tp blm final),namun mgkn ms2 sesudah perpecahan sektarian.

Namun tradisi Theravāda, seperti yang tercatat dalam Sumaṅgalavilasīnī, Kitab Komentar dari Dighanikāya, percaya bahwa susunan sutta2 Dīghanikāya ke dalam tiga vagga terjadi di Konsili Agung Pertama. Dalam pembacaaan Dhamma sendiri dikatakan bahwa Bhikkhu Mahā Kassapa bertanya tentang Brahmajalasutta terlebih dahulu ke Bhikkhu Ānanda. Kemudian dilanjutkan ke sutta2 lainnya.

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #13 on: 28 February 2010, 01:36:22 PM »
 [at] Dhammasiri:
O ternyata Ven Dhammasiri adalah seorang samanera y? Maaf karena ketidaktahuan sy sehingga telah tidak hormat memanggil anda sbg "sdr".....

 [at] Peacemind:
Ya, tradisi Theravada meyakini bahwa seluruh kanon Pali yang mereka miliki berasal dari Konsili Pertama dan kemudian dituliskan pada (kalau tidak salah) Konsili Keempat di Sri Lanka tanpa ada perubahan sedikit pun.

Walaupun catatan tentang Konsili Pertama terdapat pada semua aliran Buddhis, namun ada sedikit perbedaan dalam hal detail kejadian/pembacaan yang dilakukan, misalnya urutan pembacaan suttanya.
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Sejarah Konsili Buddhis Pertama meburut Berbagai Aliran
« Reply #14 on: 28 February 2010, 02:15:45 PM »
Ini ada artikel tentang perbandingan versi-versi Konsili Pertama Buddhis berdasarkan berbagai aliran Buddhis awal dalam bahasa Inggris.

Penulisan nama/istilah Pali/Sanskerta-nya masih agak kacau karena memang demikian dari sumber aslinya (mungkin pakai cara penulisan lama)

Quote
THE FIRST BUDDHIST COUNCIL
[/b]

THE FIRST CONVOCATION OF BUDDHISM.

   The purpose of the present article is not to enter into an historical or critical examination of the First Convocation of the Buddhist Order, which is generaily admitted by all the schools of Buddhism to have taken place immediately after the death of the Master. Though, some critics, for instance, Oldenberg, doubts its historical reality, it is apparently natural that the pious disciples of Buddha wished to rescue all his teachings from oblivion as soon as an opportunity presented itself. It may not, of course, have taken place in all its details as told by different sects, but even then those records possess an important historical significance on account of the light which they throw on the later development of Buddhism. Having this in view, I have collected and compared as many materials as available from the Chinese sources, but have refrained from giving an entire translation of them, which, however interesting to the specialist, cannot be presented in a limited space. The following summarised notes may serve in giving some insight into the nature of the First Convocation as well as into the attitude assumed towards it by different schools of Buddhism.

SOURCES.

   The Chinese sources relating to the First Convocation of Buddhism are as follow:

   1. The Sudarçana-vinaya-vibhâshâ (right-comprehension-vinaya-analysis): Case Han,[1] fas. VIII., pp. 1-4. (Translated by Samghabhadra, A.D. 489. 18 fasciculi.)

   2. The Mahîçâsaka-nikâya-pañcavarga-vinaya (the Vinaya-text of the Mahîçâsaka school in five divisions): Case Chang, fas. II., p. 259 pp. 68-69. (Translated by Buddhajîva with the assistance of some native Chinese Buddhists, A.D. 423-424. 30 fasciculi.)

[1. This refers to the Japanese edition of the Chinese Tripitaka. 1883. commonly known as the Kôkyô Shoin Edition.]

   3. The Caturvarga-vinaya (the Vinaya-text of the Dharmagupta school in four divisions): Case Lieh, fas. VI. , pp. 49-51. (Translated by Buddhayaças and Chu Fo-nien, A.D. 405. 60 fasciculi.)

   4. The Mahâsanghika-vinaya (the Vinaya-text of the Mahâsanghika school): Case Lieh, fas. X., 32-35. (Translated by Buddhabhadra and Fâ-hsien, A.D. 416. 46 fasciculi.)

   5. The Mûlasarvâstivâda-nikâya-vinaya-samyuktavastu (the miscellaneous part of the Vinaya-text of the Sarvâstivâda school): Case Han, fas. II., pp. 87-93. (Translated by I-tsing, A.D. 710. 40 fasciculi.)

   6. The Vinaya-mâtrikâ Sûtra (the Sûtra of the Vinaya-summaries): Case Han, fas. IX., pp. 15-16. (The translator's name is lost, but the work is considered to have been done under the Chin dynasty, A.D. 350-431. 8 fasciculi.)

   7. The Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Çastra (a treatise on the great wisdom-perfection): Case Wang, fas. I., pp. 15-17. (The work is ascribed to Nâgârjuna. A commentary on the Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Sûtra. Translated by Kumârajîva, A.D. 402-405. 100 fasciculi. The original is said to have been thrice as large as the present translation.)

   8. The Life of King Açoka: Case Tsang, fas. X., pp. 13-14. (Translated by An Fa-chin, between A.D. 281-306. 5 or 6 fasciculi.)

   9. The Record of the Compilation of the Three Pitakas and the Miscellaneous Pitaka: Case Tsang, fas. VIII., pp. 32-35. (The translator's name is lost, but the work is said to be a production of the Eastern Chin dynasty, A.D. 317-420.)

   10. The Sûtra on Kaçyapa's Compilation: Case Tsang, fas. VIII., pp. 35-37. (Translated by Ân Shih-kao, a monk from Parthia, A.D. 148-170. The above two works are very short and consist of a few pages only.)

   11. The Accounts of the Transmission of the Dharmapitaka: Case Tsang, fas. IX., p. 92. (Translated by Chi-chia-yeh [Ki.mkâra?], A.D. 472. 6 fasciculi.)

   Besides the above works we may consult Fâ-hsien and Hsüan-tsang as well, but I have refrained from making extracts from these works, because good English and French translations are accessible to the students of Buddhism.

CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH LED KÂÇYAPA TO SUMMON THE FIRST CONVOCATION.

   That Mahâkâçyapa, the first Buddhist patriarch, was the originator of the first assembly for compiling the Pitakas, is a matter of general acceptance by all schools of Buddhism. His motive, according to the Ceylon tradition, is ascribed to the imprudent utterance of a certain Bhikshu Subhadra[1] who, hearing of Buddh'a's entrance into Nirvâna, unreservedly gave vent to his feeling of relief, for he thought the religious discipline demanded by his Master was too rigorous. This tradition agrees with the records in the Vinaya texts of the Mahîçâsaka, the Mahâsa.nghika, and the Dharmagupta schools, and also with those in the Vinaya-mâtrikâ-Sûtra and the Sudarçana-Vinaya-vibhâshâ,[2] whereas in the Vinaya text of the Dharmagupta an additional reason why the Pitaka should be rehearsed immediately after Buddha's death is given by Kâçyapa thus: "We should now compile[3] the Dharma and the Vinaya, in order that heretics (tîrthakas) shall not make us [the subject of] superfluous comments and censures, saying that the discipline of the Çrâma.na Gautama is like smoke; that when the World-honored One was living, all [his disciples] observed the precepts, but now, after his disappearance, there are none who observe them."

   But the Vinaya text of the Sarvâstivâda, Transmission of the Dharmapitaka and the Mahâprajñâpâramitâ Çâstra do not make any allusion to the unwise Bhikshu. The Sarvâstivâda-vinaya, the Mahâprajñâpâramitâ Çâstra, and the Life of Açoka, on the other
hand, state that Mahâkâçyapa was requested or instigated by devas who deeply lamented the possibility of the future loss of the Pitakas, if not compiled in due time. The Transmission of the Dharmapitaka, however, says nothing about the superhuman suggestion. To quote the Sarvâstivâda-vinaya: "Those devas whose long life extends over many kalpas were greatly afflicted at witnessing the Nirvâna of Buddha. But when they came to observe that many a sage had also entered into Nirvâna, they at last began to blame [the disciples], saying: 'The Sûtra, Vinaya, and Mâtrikâ [which constitute] the genuine Dharmapitaka taught by the World-honored One are left uncompiled; but surely [the disciples] are not going to have the right doctrine turned into ashes?'"

[1. This monk Subhadra should not be confounded with Buddha's last convert, who happens to bear the same name.

2 The name of the imprudent Bhikshu is Bhânanda in the Mahîçâsaka, the Dharmagupta, and the Vinaya-mâtrikâ; Mahallaka in the Mahâsanghika; Subhadra-Mahallaka in the Sudarçana-vibhâsbâ-Vinaya.

3. Chieh chi. Literally, chieh means to tie, to join, or to unite, and chi to gather, to collect, to compile, and the like. The term is apparently an equivalent of samgîti, but I have retained its Chinese sense by translating it "compilation."]

   Surmising the wish of those devas, Mahâkâçyapa said to all Bhikshus: "You know that the venerable Çâriputra and the venerable Mahâmaudgalyâyana, each with a large number of great Bhikshus who could not bear witnessing Buddha's entrance into Mahânirvâna, had already reverted to a state of perfect tranquillity; and now the World-honored One himself, in turn with 18,000 Bhikshus, has also entered into Parinirvâna. All those devas who are living innumerable kalpas, however, come forth to express their deep grief, and blame us, saying: 'Why do you not have the holy teachings of the Tripitaka compiled? Are you going to have the deepest spiritual doctrine of the Tathâgata turned into ashes?' So I declare to you all that the greatest thing we can do now is the compilation of the Pitaka. All then responded: 'Well, let us do the work.'"

   In the Transmission of the Dharmapitaka, Mahâkâçyapa is stated to have told all Bhikshus, as follows: "Buddha is now cremated, but we have no concern with the relics (çârîra) of the World-honored One, for kings, the rich, ministers of state, and lay-believers who desire the most excellent bliss will, of their own accord, make offerings [to them]. What we have to do is the collection of the Dharmacakshu [literally, the eye of the law], whereby to prevent an untimely extinction of the torch of the law. ln order that it may illuminate the future generation, let a prosperous perpetuation of the Triratna be not interrupted."

   The Record of the Collection of the Tripitaka and the Samyuktapitaka, which was translated during the Eastern Tsin dynasty, A.D. 317-420, agrees with the above-mentioned work in referring neither to the imprudent Bhikshu nor to the suggestion of devas.

THE EXCLUSION OF ÂNANDA.

   It is almost[1] unanimously recorded in all the Chinese books that Ânanda was not admitted to membership in the Convocation, until he attained to the state of mastery, through the reprimand of Mahâkâçyapa, which successfully awakened in his heart the feelings of deep remorse and shame. There is, however, no agreement of statements as to how Ânanda was instigated by him in obtaining final emancipation.

   According to The Sudarçana-vibhâshâ-vinaya, Mahâkâçyapa insisted on the exclusion of Ânanda from the Convocation in order to protect it against all the reprehension that might arise from admitting one who was still in the stage of training; but the rest of the congregation thought it impossible to compile the Sûtras without Ânanda, so they admonished him to exert all his spiritual powers for the attainment of Arhatship.

   The Life of Açoka, the Caturvarga-vinaya of the Dharmagupta school, and the Pañcavarga-vinaya of the Mahîçâsaka school, these three works generally agree in this connection. Ânanda was preaching the Law to a large crowd of people, not knowing anything about Mahâkâçyapa's determination to exclude him from the meeting. A certain Bhikshu named Po-she,[2] who perceived through his supernatural insight that Ânanda was not yet free from attachment, felt pity for him, and told him the following in verse:

"Calmly sitting under a tree, contemplate Nirvâna.
Be not indolent, but exercise Dhyâna.
For what good would there be in chattering?"

[1. Except the Transmission of the Dharmapitaka, where no mention is made of this incident.

2. So in the Caturvarga-vinaya, but Po-ch'i in the Pañcavarga-vinaya, and Po-shê-fu-to, as a disciple of Ânanda, in the Life of Açoka. It is very difficult to find the Sanskrit equivalents of those names when their meanings are not given, for there is a tendency among the so-called "old translators" to simplify long Sanskrit terms in such a manner as to make them appear like native Chinese names.]

   Thereupon Ânanda made up his mind to obtain final emancipation, etc., etc.

   In the Sarvâstivâda-vinaya, a verse slightly different in meaning from the above is also mentioned, but it was given by a mysterious boy who served him as an attendant, instead of by a Bhikshu. This incident occurred after a severe censure by Mahâkâçyapa of eight misdemeanors committed by Ânanda. The Vinaya text states that Mahâkâçyapa at first considered what would be the proper way of treating Ânanda, whether with a severe reprehension or with a gentle encouragement. When he had determined to take the first course, Ânanda was brought before the congregation. Mahâkâçyapa said: "You must leave this place. [It is not proper for] this congregation of worthy [Bhikshus] to be associated with you in their work." Hearing this, Ânanda felt as if his heart were being pierced with arrows, and, trembling all over his body, he pleaded with Mahâkâçyapa not to exclude him from the congregation, as he was not conscious of any faults [which would justify this severe punishment] Mahâkâçyapa now enumerated his eight misdemeanors, which caused Ânanda at last to retire from the assembly and to train himself for the attainment of Arhatship.

   In the Mahâsanghika-vinaya, Ânanda is stated to have received a very humiliating treatment from Mahâkâçyapa. When Mahâkâçyapa was requested by Bhikshus to admit the former to their assembly, he said: "No, if such a one [who is still in the stage] of training should be admitted into a congregation of those who are above training and are perfect in their meritorious powers, he would appear like a leprous fox (?) in an assemblage of lions." When this ignominious comparison was communicated by a deva to Ânanda, who was travelling towards Râjagriha, it did not please him at all. But he thought that Mahâkâçyapa who well knew to what family he belonged, would not have referred to him in such a way, if he were free from prejudices. But in the meantime having attained final deliverance, Ânanda hastened through the air to the Convocation. Mahâkâçyapa, it is stated, then explained to him that he used such a vigorous expression, only as he wished to encourage him to reach the stage of Arhatship.

   In the Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ-Çâstra, the episode is described somewhat in a similar way to that in the Sarvâstivâda-vinaya. Ânanda is brought before the congregation by Mahâkâçyapa, and is reproached first for his not being yet qualified to rejoin it, and then for his six (not eight) misdemeanors. When Ânanda is expelled from the assembly, Mahâkâçyapa closes the gate behind him, and begins to compile the Vinaya with the remaining Bhikshus. Exceedingly mortified, Ânanda during the night exercised all his spiritual powers to reach the Path, and when at last he attained to the state of freedom from all prejudices, he rushed at midnight to Mahâkâçyapa's gates. Being told there to come inside through the keyhole, he did so by his supernatural power. Mahâkâçyapa consoled him, saying that the severe reproach had been inflicted upon him simply because he wished to see him enter into the state of Arhatship.

   In the Sûtra on Kâçyapa's Compilation [of the Tripitaka] Ânanda is said to have been expelled from the congregation after he was censured by Mahâkâçyapa for his nine misdemeanors in the presence of the Samgha.


Bersambung.....
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #15 on: 28 February 2010, 02:18:32 PM »
Quote
ÂNANDA'S MISDEMEANORS.

   When Ânanda said to Mahâkâçyapa that he was not conscious of any faults, and that therefore there was no reason to exclude him from the assembly, Mahâkâçyapa enumerated several of his (duskrita), which were considered by him to be the proof that Ânanda was still in the stage of training. This incident is said to have occurred, according to some, before the compilation, but according to others, after it. To the former belong the Sarvâstivâda-vinaya, the Sûtra on Kâçyapa's compilation, the Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ-Çâstra, and the Caturvarga-vinaya of the Dharmagupta school; to the latter belong the Vinayamâtrikâ Sûtra, the Pañcavarga-vinaya of the Mahîçâsaka, the Life of Açoka, and the Mahâ-samghika-vinaya. But in the Caturvarga-vinaya, the Mahâsamghika-vinaya,[1] the Life of Açoka, the Pañcavarga-vinaya, the faults of Ânanda are simply enumerated without any reference to his qualification as a member of the Convocation.

[1. Here the accuser is not Mahâkâçyapa, but Upâli.]

   The number of his faults as censured by Mahâkâçyapa or Upâli is variously estimated at six, seven, eight, and nine. The following sums up all that was charged against him:

   1. Ânanda asked Buddha for the admittance of women into the Samgha, in spite of Buddha's prediction that if women were admitted, the Law of the Tathâgata would not long abide on earth.[1]

   2. Ânanda did not ask Buddha for the prolongation of his life, when the latter expressly suggested this to him, by saying that those who were trained in the four supernatural powers could either prolong or shorten their life for the period of one kalpa.

   3. When Buddha preached in parables, Ânanda made, in spite of his presence, some superfluous remark on them.

   4. Ânanda trod on Buddha's golden-colored robe while trying to wash it (a), or while trying to sew it (b).

   5. Being asked by Buddha to give him some water when he was going to enter into Nirvâna, Ânanda gave him muddy water (a), or he did not give him any, even when thrice asked (b).

   6. When Buddha told Ânanda that Bhikshus might dispense with minor precepts, he did not make any inquiry as to what precepts should be regarded minor.[2]

   7. Ânanda exposed the secret parts of Buddha in the presence of women, thinking that the act would tend to the cessation of their passions, but how could he know this when he had not yet attained to the stage of Arhatship?

   8. Ânanda showed the gold-colored body of Buddha to a multitude of women, allowing them to defile it with their tears.

   9. Ânanda first allowed women to worship the remains of Buddha.

   10. When Ânanda was one time reproached by Buddha, he secretly cherished ill-will, and was mischievous to others.

[1. Most of the Chinese books here referred to give all the reasons by which Ânanda justified himself for having committed those alleged misdemeanors, but from want of space, no mention here is made of them.

2. This naturally caused a vehement demonstration among the Samgha later.]

   11. Ânanda was not yet free from the three evil passions: lust, malice, and ignorance, while all the other Bhikshus assembled in the Convocation were free therefrom.

   12. Buddha asked Ânanda three times to serve him as one who offers things (?) to Buddha, but he declined it.[1]

   The number and the order of these faults committed by Ânanda are different in different works.

   In the Sarvâstivâda-vinaya eight faults are counted in the following order: 1, 2, 3, 4a, 5a, 6, 7, 8.

   The Pañcavarga-vinaya counts six in this order: 6, 4b, 1, 2, 5b, 9.

   The Life of Açoka, six: 6, 5b, 4 (simply stepping on Buddha's robe), 2, 7 (the reason given by Ânanda is that he wished to awake in the minds of women the desire to be born as men in their future life), 1.

   The Sûtra on Kâçyapa's Compilation has nine: 1, 2, 10, 4 (simply stepping over the golden robe of Buddha), 5b, 6, 7, 8, 11.

   The Caturvarga-vinaya states seven: 1, 12, 4b, 2, 5b, 6, 8.

   The Mahâsamghika-vinaya describes seven, thus: 1, 2, 4b, 5b, 6, 7, 8.

   The Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Çâstra has six: 1, 5b,[2] 2, 4 (when folding), 7.

   The Vinaya-mâtrikâ Sûtra merely states that Mahâkâçyapa accused Ânanda for his seven faults, but does not particularise any of them: on the other hand it relates nine disadvantages arising from the admittance of women into the Samgha.

   It is significant that the Sudarçana-vinaya does not make any reference to Ânanda's misdemeanors.

[1. Note how trifling all these accusations are.

2. The fault is viewed here from two points: (1) not giving any water, (2) not knowing the fact that Buddha is able to cleanse any kind of water .]

THE INCIDENT OF GAVÂMPATI.

   The incident of Gavâmpati in connection with the First Convocation is stated in all the Mahâyâna literature and also in some[3] of the Hînayâna. In the Mahâyâna literature we have the following works: The Life of Açoka, the Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Çâstra, the Sûtra concerning Kâçyapa's Compilation, the Record of the Transmission of the Dharmapitaka, and the Record of the Compilation of the Tripitaka and the Samyuktapitaka. On the other hand, the Vinaya-mâtrikâ Sûtra, the Caturvarga-vinaya, the Pañcavarga-vinaya, and the Sudarçana-vinaya, all of which belong to documents of the Hînayâna class, make no statement about the Gavâmpati incident.

[3. That is, the Sarvâstivâda-vinaya and the Mahâsamghika-vinaya.]

   The incident of Gavâmpati, though it is more or less differently recorded as to its details in different works, is briefly this. Hearing the great bell rung by Mahâkâçyapa, the five hundred Bhikshus[1] hastened to the place of meeting, but when Mahâkâçyapa found that one of them[2] called Gavâmpati[3] had not yet joined them, he asked Anuruddha of the whereabouts of the missing Bhikshu. Being told that he was enjoying a peaceful life in one of the Heavens,[4] he sent a message thither to invite him to the convocation presided over by Mahâkâçyapa. Gavâmpati, who knew nothing about the late events relating to Buddha and his disciples, scrutinisingly asked the messenger why Mahâkâçyapa, instead of the Blessed One himself, stood at the head of the congregation: what was the object of such a grand religious convention, and some other questions.[5] When he was informed of all that had been going on below, he was so greatly afflicted that he said he had now no inclination to descend to the earth, which was made entirely desolate by the eternal departure of Buddha. So saying, Gavâmpati entered into a state of deep meditation, suddenly rose in the air shining with supernatural brilliancy, and then consumed himself in a heavenly fire.[6]

[1. The number of the Bhikshus who took part in the First Convocation is generally estimated at five hundred, but according to the Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Çâstra, the Convocation consisted of one thousand Bhikshus.

2. According to the Mahâsamghika, two Bhikshus were missing when the members were counted by Kâçyapa, but one of them, Anuruddha, soon joined them.

3. The Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Çâstra makes him a disciple of Çâriputra.

4. According to some, the Çrîvriksha (?) palace, but according to others the Çrîdeva palace.

5. So in the Sarvâstivâda-vinaya.

6. The Sarvâstivâda-vinaya, the Mahâprajñâ-pâramitâ Çâstra, and the Sûtra on Kâçyapa's Compilation relate, in addition, that four streams ran out of his transfigured body, each murmuring a gâthâ which proclaimed the transiency of life and the lamentable departure of the Lord.]

   The Mahâ-prajñâ-pâramitâ Çâstra says that Gavâmpati having been fully familiar with the Vinaya and the Sûtra, his presence was necessary to the assembly.

   According to the Mahâsamghika-vinaya, Mahâkâçyapa sent several messages to Heaven to summon those Bhikshus who were abiding there, but all of them, having learned that Buddha had already entered into Parinirvâna, were so exceedingly mortified that they disappeared one after another in the same manner. Mahâkâçyapa then declared that no more messages would be despatched to Heaven, nor should those Bhikshus who were living on earth enter into Nirvâna until their work of great importance had been completed.

"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #16 on: 28 February 2010, 02:19:15 PM »
Quote
THE PROCEEDINGS.

   What was done by the Convocation? Were the Vinayapitaka and the Sûtrapitaka alone compiled? Did a compilation of the Abhidharmapitaka also take place? Did any dissension occur in the assembly? These questions constitute the most important part of the First Convocation, and the following abstracts from various Chinese translations are calculated to throw some light on them.

   A. The Vinaya in Four Divisions (Caturvarga-vinaya).--When the cremation ceremony of Buddha was over, all the five hundred Bhikshus went from Vaiçâli to Râjagriha, where Mahâkâçyapa intended to summon the assembly. First, Ânanda was blamed for his seven faults, as already mentioned; then Upâli was requested to recite the Vinaya, beginning with the first of the Principal Sins (Pârâjika), as to the individual, the circumstance, and the nature of the crime. Rules concerning the Bhikshu and the Bhikshuni, the Prâ.timoksha, the Poshadha, the Residing Season, the Wandering Season, the use of leather, the robes, medicaments, the Ka.thina ceremonies,--all these regulations were incorporated in the Vinaya.

   Ânanda was next asked to compile the Sûtrapitaka. Such Sûtras as the Brahma-jâla (translated Brahma-moving), the Ekottara (increasing by one), the Daçottara (increasing by ten), the Formation and Destruction of the World, the Sa.ngîti (chorus), the Mahânidâna (great cause), the Questions of the Çakradeva (Indra), were included in the Longer Âgama (Pâli, Dîgha Nikâyo); those Sûtras of middle length were called the Middling Âgama (Pâli, Majjhima Nikâyo); those in which the subjects were arranged numerically from one to eleven were called the Âgama Increasing by One (A.nguttara Nikâyo); those which were miscellaneously preached for (?) the Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upâsakas, Upâsikâs, Devas, Çakra, Mâras, and Brâhmarâjas, were called the Miscellaneous Âgama (Samyutta Nikâyo); and lastly such Sûtras as the Jâtaka, Itivrittika,[1] Nidâna, Vaipulya, Adbhûta, Avadâna, Upadeça, the Explanation of Aphorisms (Nirdeça?), Dharmapada, Pârâyana,[2] Miscellaneous Discussions and several Gâthâs, were comprised in the Miscellaneous Pitaka, (Pâli, Khuddaka Nikâyo, with other matter). The Discursive [Book] (Kathâ Vatthu),[3] the Non-discursive [Book] (Vibha.nga or Puggala paññati?), the Yoking (Dhamma Sanga.ni?), the Correlating (Yamaka?), and the Place of Birth (Pa.t.thâna?) made up the Abhidharmapitaka.[4]

   B. The Vinaya in Five Divisions (Pañcavarga-vinaya).--When the five hundred Bhikshus were assembled in Râjagriha, Mahâkâçyapa inquired of Upâli in due formulary of the four Principal Precepts (Pârâjika) as to the place where they were occasioned, as to the individual with whom they were concerned, and as to the matter with which they dealt. All the Vinaya, for the Bhikshus as well as for the Bhikshunis, was compiled in this way.

   Mahâkâçyapa then asked Ânanda where Buddha taught the Ekôttara Sûtra, the Daçôttara Sûtra, the Mahânidâna Sûtra, the Samgiti Sûtra, the Çrâmañaphala Sûtra, the Brahmajâla (translated Brahmâ-moving), as well as those Sûtras which were preached to Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upâsakas, Upâsikâs, Devapûtras, and Devis. When all the Sûtras were thus recited, Mahâkâçyapa declared to the Samgha: "Those longer Sûtras which are now compiled in one group shall be called the Longer Âgama; those Sûtras which are neither long nor short, and are now compiled in one group, shall be called the Middling Âgama; those which are miscellaneously preached to Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upâsakas, Upâsikâs, Devapûtras, and Devis, and are now compiled in one group, shall be called the Miscellaneous Âgama; those Sûtras which start with one dharma and increase by one, up to eleven dharmas, and are now compiled in one group, shall be called the Âgama Increasing by One; while the remainder, all consisting of miscellaneous teaching, and now compiled in one group, shall be called the Miscellaneous Pitaka. And to them all shall be given a collective name, Sûtrapitaka. We have now finished compiling the Law, and henceforth let us not put any unnecessary restraint on what was not restrained by Buddha; let us not violate what has already been restrained by Buddha; let us sincerely train ourselves according to the teachings of Buddha."

[1. Not given by Beal.

2. Beal gives the Anâgata-Bhayâni and Munigâthâ.

3. This and following four titles are so concisely given in the text that it is very difficult to make out what they are, and the translation and the reference to the Pâli Abhidharma works here presented are merely tentative.

4. The text is reticent about the author of the compilation of this Pitaka.]

   C. The Vinaya-mâtrikâ Sûtra.--Ânanda being admitted to join the assembly, and the five hundred Arhats having taken their seats, they began to compile the Tripitaka out of the materials which consisted of Sûtras in five or five hundred[1] divisions. Rules for the Bhikshu and Bhikshuni, and the Skandhas (divisions) relating to the Ka.thina and other things composed the Vinayapitaka. The four Âgamas, (1) Long, (2) Middling, (3) Increasing by One, and (4) Miscellaneous--the last one consisting of those Sûtras which relate to Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, the Çakrendra, devas, and Brâhmarâjâs, as well as (5) the sundry collection which comprised the Dharmapada, the Exposition, the Pârâyana, the Upadeça and others,--these five groups of the Sûtras were classified under the Sûtrapitaka. The Discursive (or Dialogical) Treatise (Kathâ vatthu?),

[1. According to other editions.]

the Non-discursive (or Non-dialogical) Treatise (Vibhanga?), the Mutual Enclosing (Dharma Sanga.ni?), the Correlating (Yamaka?), and the Regions (Dhâtu Kathâ or Patthâna?)[1] made up the Abhidharmapitaka. And the general name Tripitaka was given to them all.
D. The Vinaya Text of the Sarvâstivâda School.--Mahâkâçyapa and the five hundred Bhikshus kept the assembly in the Pippâla Cave. He announced that as Bhikshus in coming generations would be inferior in their natural endowment (literally, root, mûla?) and lacking in the power of concentration, the assembly would first compile, for the sake of such, the Gâthâs (verses)[2] in which the Sûtra, Vinaya and Abhidharma[3] were treated in comprehensive brevity. This was done before the meal. They then proceeded to compile the Sûtras. Ânanda was requested by Mahâkâçyapa as well as by the Samgha to select and compile them. Having gone through due formality and having reflected on the impermanence of things, he thought: "Among those Sûtras which I heard personally from Buddha, some are traditional,[4] some are preachings in the Nâga (Serpent) Palace,[5] others are preachings in the heavens.

[1. Those five titles of the books contained in the Abhidharmapitaka closely agree, though the translation is a little different, with those above referred to in the Vinaya in Five Divisions, but the terms being too concise, we cannot give anything more than a mere conjecture as to their correspondence to the Pâli works.

2. Was the Gâthâ already existing side by side with the prose at the time of the First Convocation? Did Buddha himself put some most important tenets of his doctrine into a rhythmical form, that his disciples might learn them by heart? (Yes: See S. B. E., XIII., p. 151.--Edmunds.)

3. Were some parts of the Abhidharma also versified?

4. Does this mean that Buddha preached on some traditional subjects, or that some Sûtras deal with traditions, or that the first sermons of Buddha, such as were delivered for the five Bhikshus in Vârânasî before the conversion of Ânanda, were heard by him afterwards from Buddha's own mouth, or from those who were then present, in which case the term tradition would be used in the sense of hearsay? Judging from similar passages in some other works, the last sense seems to be most preferable.

5 This statement is most significant, for many Mahâyâna texts are said to have been taken from the Nâga Palace where they were long preserved in secret. The Vinaya text of the Sarvâstivâda is generally considered to belong to the Hînayâna work, and this fact makes the above statement much more mysterious. Is the Nâga Palace an ideal creation of later Buddhists? or is it some yet unknown region in the Himâlaya? [Buddha converted several yakkhas, nâgas, etc.--Edmunds.]]

As I keep them all in memory and do not forget any of them, I shall now recite them." All Devas expressed their willingness to listen, and Mahâkâçyapa praised the words of Buddha as the foremost of all doctrines.

   Ânanda then recited the first Sûtra, the Dharmaçakrapravartana (Revolution of the Law-wheel), which was taught in Benâres for the five Bhikshus, one of whom, Ajñâta Kau.n.di.nya, being present in the assembly, told Mahâkâçyapa how at that time he gained the eye of the Law. Hearing this, devas as well as those Bhikshus who were not yet freed from attachment,[1] uttered a pitiful cry as if their hearts were being pierced with thousands of arrows, and lamented that they could not hear those words of Buddha any more from his own mouth. In this lamentation the Bhikshus of the assembly also joined. When they recovered from the shock of deep feeling, Mahâkâçyapa declared that this first Sûtra, taught by the Blessed One, having been accepted by all, should be recognised as the genuine doctrine of Buddha.

   The second Sûtra, Ânanda now went on, which was also preached in Benâres for the sake of the five Bhikshus, consisted in the elucidation of the Four Noble Truths and the Eight Right Paths. Kau.n.di.nya's confirmation and Mahâkâçyapa's conclusion were declared as before.

   The occasion which induced Buddha to preach the third Sûtra was also in Benâres for the sake of the five Bhikshus. He taught that the five Skandhas (aggregates) have no Âtman, that they are subject to transformation, that they cause misery, that one can save oneself from misery through a right comprehension of the nature of things. The conclusion of Mahâkâçyapa was the same as before.

[1. This is very strange, considering that those who were admitted to the assembly were all free from attachment, that is, they were all Arhats; but in spite of this were many other Bhikshus also admitted as the audience, though not actually partaking in the work of the compilation of the Tripitaka? In the Mahâyâna work a statement is sometimes made to the effect that the followers of the Mahâyâna Buddhism had their own convocation somewhere in the neighborhood. Does the present text refer to this, or to the council of the Mahâsanghika school as it is mentioned in Hsüan-Tsang?]

   In this way all the other Sûtras taught by Buddha in several places were recited by Ânanda and confirmed by the Arhats of the assembly. They were all classified in proper forms according to the subject: for example, Sûtras which treated the five Skandhas were grouped under the heading of Skandha, those which treated the six Âyatanas or the eighteen Dhâtus were classified under the Âyatana or Dhâtu; and so on with the (twelve) Chains of Causation, the (four) Noble Truths, the speeches of Çrâvakas, the speeches of Buddha, the (four) subjects of Recollection, the (four kinds of) Right Effort, the (four) Supernatural Powers, the (five) Indriyas, the (five) Balas, and the (eight) Bodhyangas.[1]

   Those Sûtras which are in coincidence with the Gâthâs (verse parts), were called the Coincidence[2] Âgama; those which consist of lengthy teachings, the Longer Âgama; those which are of medium length, the Middling Âgama; those in which the subjects are numerically arranged, the Âgama Increasing by One. "There are," says Mahâkâçyapa, "no other Âgamas than these" now compiled.

   Next, the Convocation proceeded to compile the Vinaya, led by Upâli, who was considered by Buddha to be the first of the Vinaya-dharâ.[3] Being asked by Mahâkâçyapa where, to whom, and on what the first rule of propriety, (Çikshâ)[4] was announced by Buddha, Upâli said that it was in Vârâ.nasi (Benâres) and for the five Bhikshus, and that the matter related to the arrangement of the undergarment. The second Çikshâ was recited by him in the same way.

[1. These subjects also appear in the Abhidharmapitaka, as we see below. Do the statements mean that those subjects as taught by Buddha were classified with the Sûtrapitaka, while a further exposition of the same by his disciples was included in the Abhidharma?

2. Samyukta in Sanskrit. Coincidence is a literal translation of it, which is commonly rendered miscellaneous, according to its derived meaning--so says the text.

3. Literally, those who carry the Vinaya, i.e. , know it by heart.

4. It is very strange that Mahâkâçyapa did not first ask Upâli about the four Principal Sins (Pârâjika), instead of about such insignificant regulations as the Çikshâ rules. Why does the Sarvâstivâda school attach such importance to the latter, while other schools invariably give the first place to the Pârâjika, as is naturally expected? Noticing, however, the in consistent statement which is made immediately below, I am inclined to think that some spurious elements have crept later into the body of the original text.]

   As for the third Çikshâ, the text continues as follows:[1] "Mahâkâçyapa again said to Upâli: Where did the World-Honored One announce the Çikshâ? Upâli replied with a clear, penetrating voice: In Kala.n.daka Village.--For whom?--For Bhikshu Sudinna, son of Kala.n.daka.--What was the matter? If a Bhikshu training himself in the disciplinary rules, commits an adulterous act with another Bhikshu or with an animal, he performs a Pârâjika fault; nor is he allowed to cohabit."[2]

   In this way all the parts of the Vinaya were compiled, which consist of the Pârâjika rules, Samghâvaçesa rules, two Aniyata rules, thirty Naissargika rules, ninety Prâyaçcittika rules, four Pratideçanîya rules, a number of Çikshâ rules, seven Adhikara.naçamatha, as well as the principal rules, obligatory rules, voluntary rules, rules for the Bhikshu, rules for the Upâsaka, regulations of the Karmavâca, conditions for conversion, the Poshadha, the season of residence, the wandering season, general and miscellaneous regulations, and the circumstances which brought forth all these rules and regulations.

   The compilation of the Vinaya being thus finished, it now occurred to Mahâkâçyapa that, as the people in coming generations would be so lacking in intelligence and so poor in natural endowment that they could not comprehend the deep significance of the Doctrine by studying the text only, he himself would recite the Mâtrikâ,[3] that is, Abhidharma, whereby to prevent the spirit of the Sûtra and the Vinaya from being obliterated by arbitrary interpretations. Having obtained the sanction of the Convocation, he comprised under the Mâtrikâ the following subjects: the four Objects of Smriti (recollections), the four Right Efforts, the four Supernatural

[1. The following quotation clearly shows how confusing the text is: "Upâli was asked to recite the third Çikshâ, and is stated to have told them about the first Pârâjika instead." As I remarked just above, the text must be considered to contain some later additions.

2. Literally, to live together.

3. Originally tables of contents, as may be seen in the Pâli texts.--A.J.E.]

Powers (Riddhi), the five Indriyas (lit. root), the five Powers (Bala), the seven Bodhyangas (constituent parts of enlightenment), the Eightfold Noble Path, the four Abhayas (fearlessness), the four Pratisamvids (unimpeded knowledge), the four Çrâmanaphala (obtainment of Çrama.naship), the four Dharmapadas, the Ârañya (solitude), Wish, Knowledge, the Dhyâna of Boundary (the fourth Dhyâna?), Emptiness (Çûnyatâ), Unconditionality (Animitta), Freedom from Desire (Apra.nihita), miscellaneous Disciplines, various Meditations, the Right Entering, Presentation (or perception), Knowledge of Phenomena, Çamatha (tranquilisation), Vipaçyana (insight), the Dharmasamgraha, and the Dharmaskandha.[1]

   When the compilation of the Sûtra, the Vinaya, and the Abhidharma was thus done, the heaven and the earth resounded with the praise of the devas.

"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #17 on: 28 February 2010, 02:20:03 PM »
Quote
   E. The Vinaya text of the Mahâsanghika school.--Having reached at last the state of Arhatship, Ânanda was permitted to join the assembly, which unanimously acknowledged him as the disciple of best memory. They requested him to compile the Dharmapitaka.[2] When Ânanda began to recite, "Thus have I heard: 'Buddha was at one time in the Bodhima.n.dara by the river Nairañjanâ,'" the five hundred Bhikshus showed their deep feeling, which, however, soon passed to the calm reflection that all things which originate from a combination of causes are necessarily subject to ruin and transformation.

   The Dharmapitaka thus compiled by Ânanda consisted of the Longer Âgama; the Middling Âgama; the Miscellaneous Âgama,

[1. Observe that some of those subjects also appear in the Sûtrapitaka, while the identity of others cannot be determined, owing to the brevity of the statement.

2. According to some the Dharmapitaka is identified with the Sûtrapitaka, as in the present text; while, according to others, it is a general name given to the entire collection of the sacred writings. This disagreement among the records of different Buddhist schools apparently shows that at the earlier stage of development of Buddhist literature there was no definite name for the Pitaka compiled by the First Convocation, which had probably been known by the simple designation, Buddhavâcâ (Words of Buddha). Therefore we shall not run much risk in considering those terms which are now currently used by Buddhists themselves, as well as by Buddhist scholars, (to-wit, Vinayapitaka, Sûtrapitaka, Abhidharma, Tripitaka or Dvipitaka), as the elaboration of later Buddhists.]

which was so called because of its dealing with miscellaneous subjects concerning predisposition (lit. root, mûla), power (bala), enlightenment (bodhi), and the path (mârga); and the Âgama Increasing by one, which was so called because of a numerical arrangement of subjects from one up to one hundred:[1] while the Miscellaneous Pitaka comprised the Udâna (narratives), Itivrittika (incidents), and Nidâna (circumstantial notes), relating to Pratyekabuddhas and Arhats, which are written in verses (Gâthâ).[2]

   Upâli, who was announced by Buddha as well as by the Sa.ngha as the first of the Vinaya-dharâ, was asked next to compile the Vinaya text. He first told the Convocation that there were five sorts of purity, and then proceeded to censure Ânanda for having committed the seven faults as stated elsewhere, two of which, however, Ânanda refused to acknowledge.[3]

   Upâli is said to have then recited the nine divisions of the Vinaya, to wit, (1) Pârâjika, (2) Samghâvaçesa, (3) two Aniyatas, (4) thirty Naissargika, (5) ninety-two Prâyaçcittika, (6) four Pratideçanîya, (7) Çikshâ, (8) seven Adhikara.naçamathas, and (9) rules conforming to the Doctrine. He also explained in addition various meanings of the Vinaya: for example, as to the distinction between the dreadful sins (pârâjika) and serious offences (sthûlâtyaya), or as to a different classification of the Vinaya-text. When thus they had finished compiling the Pitaka, the ten hundred Bhikshus staying outside[4] were called in and informed of the work of the Convocation.

[1. The reader will observe that the number of the subjects contained in the "Âgama increasing by one" differs in different texts.

2. This statement is very valuable. The Mahâsa.nghika quarreled with the Theravâda about the contents of the Khuddaka Nikâya, where these books belong, and the very treatises which the Dîpavamsa says they omitted, are wanting here.--Edmunds.

3. It is noteworthy that according to the Mahâsamghika school the man who blamed Ânanda before the assembly was not Mahâkâçyapa, but Upâli, the first of the Vinaya-dharâ.

4. What does the statement here refer to, which says one thousand Bhikshus staying outside were summoned in? Hsüan-tsang mentions that the Mahâsanghika school, being excluded from the assembly of the Sthavira school, had their own compilation, meeting to the west of Mahâkâçyapa's convocation. Does the present text refer to that?]

   A vehement discussion now arose in the assembly as to what was meant by Buddha when he said to Ânanda that the precepts of minor importance could be dispensed with. A certain group of six Bhikshus went so far to the extreme as to say that "if the World-Honored One were still living, he would have everything at once abolished." Mahâkâçyapa, whose majestic dignity and authority were equal to those of Buddha, then sternly ordered them to keep silence, and made a declaration that all which had ever been forbidden should be forbidden, and what had not been forbidden should not be forbidden, and that they should not give any chance to the heretics who were willing to blame the congregation at all costs.

   The text concludes with a list of the venerable masters through whom this knowledge of the First Convocation was lineally transmitted down to the venerable Tao-lih (Bodhibala?).[1]

   F. The Sudarçana-vinaya.--When the five hundred Bhikshus were seated, Mahâkâçyapa asked them what they would first compile, the Dharmapitaka or the Vinayapitaka, and to this they answered: "Venerable Sir, the Vinayapitaka is the life of Buddhism, and so long as the Vinayapitaka exists, Buddhism will also exist. Therefore, let us first produce the Vinayapitaka."

[1. Why not give names, so as to compare with Theravâda list in Mahâvamsa?--Edmunds.]

   The next question was who should be the principal compiler of it: Upâli suggested that Ânanda could be chosen for the position, but it was not accepted by the assembly. Being recognised by Buddha as the first of the Vinaya-dharâ, Upâli himself was prevailed upon to recite the Vinaya by a general vote. After due formulary he produced all parts of the Vinaya which consisted of the Prâtimoksha of Bhikshu and Bhikshuni, and Skandhaka, and the Parivâra.

   Mahâkâçyapa then nominated Ânanda, according to a general wish of the Sangha, to compile the Dharmapitaka. The Brâhmajâla and the Çrâmaña-phala were first recited, and then all the five divisions of the Sûtra, which consist of the Longer Agama Sûtra, the Middling Agama Sûtra, the Samyukta Sûtra, the Anguttara Sûtra, and the Khuddhaka Sûtra, the last one containing all the words of Buddha (Buddha-vâcâ) not included in the first four Âgamas.[1]

   The speeches of Buddha, the text goes on to say, are of one taste, have two functions, and are divisible into three periods: that is, they all teach the means of deliverance (moksha) which consist in morality, meditation, and understanding; they are composed of the Dharmapitaka and the Vinayapitaka; they are divisible into the first speech, the last speech, and those speeches which were delivered between them. The text then raises the question: What is the Tripitaka? to which is given the answer that it consists of Vinayapitaka, Sûtrapitaka, and Abhidharmapitaka, together with their analytic explanation.[2] The contents of the Tripitaka given in this way agree with those of the Pâli collection.[3]

   G. Mahdprajñâpâramitâ Çâstra.[4]--Mahâkâçyapa in a friendly way requests Ânanda to compile the Dharmapitaka, saying: "Though there were many great disciples of the Buddha to whom the guarding of Dharmapitaka was entrusted, they are now all gone except you. Therefore, out of the compassion for all beings and in accordance with the spirit of Buddha, you shall compile the Buddhadharmapitaka." Thus requested, Ânanda ascends the lion-seat, and reverentially turning towards the place where Buddha's Nirvâna took place, says: "Though I did not personally hear the first preaching of Buddha, I have learned it by hearsay. When Buddha was in Vârâ.nasî, he first opened the gate of nectar for the five Bhikshus and preached the Four Noble Truths of Suffering, Amassing, Cessation, and the Path. Ajñâta Kau.n.dinya was the first to perceive the Path, and 80,000 devas also all entered upon the Path."

[1. The Pâli commentaries say the same.--A. J. E.

2. This is very strange, because the text bas before said that the First Convocation compiled the Vinaya and Sûtra only. I am inclined to think that these additional statements, as well as the succeeding detailed explanation of such terms as Sûtra, Abhidharma, Pitaka, and Âgama, are later interpolations put down here by way of commentary, but which in the course of time have been mixed up with the text.

3. The Chinese characters for transliteration in the present text, so far as they have come under my notice, strongly suggest that the text is a translation of the Pâli original, though I have retained the Sanskrit terms for the sake of uniformity.

4. The present text belongs to the Mahâyâna literature, and it will be very interesting to contrast its accounts of the First Convocation with those of the preceding ones, which all belong to the Hînayâna Buddhism.]

   When the one thousand Arhats assembled in the Convocation heard the words of Buddha as recited by Ânanda, they were greatly afflicted with the thought that they could no more hear Buddha's personal address. The Sthaviras Anuruddha and Mahâkâçyapa expressed in verses their deep feelings about the impermanence of things.

   Mahâkâçyapa told Ânanda that all the teachings of Buddha, from the Dharma-cakra-pravartana Sûtra down to the Mahâparinirvâna Sûtra, should be classified in four divisions, each being called an Âgama, viz.: the Âgama Increasing by One, the Middling Âgama, the Longer Âgama, and the Coincidence Âgama.[1] And to them all was given a general name: Sûtradharmapitaka.

   Upâli, who was recognised by the Samgha to be the first of the Vinaya-dharâ among the five hundred Arhats,[2] was then asked to recite the Vinaya consisting of eighty divisions.[3]

   Lastly, Ânanda was again requested to recite the first Abhidharma taught by Buddha, as he was acknowledged among the five hundred Arhats to be most conversant with the exposition of the Sûtra. He addressed the Sangha: "Thus have I heard: Buddha was at one time in Çrâvasti, when he told the Bhikshus that those who neither removed nor exterminated the five dreadful [sins], the five misdemeanors, and the five sorts of malice, would suffer in consequence innumerable misfortunes in this life, bodily as well as spiritual, and in the future would fall down into the evil paths; that those, however, who were free from these five dreadful [sins], five misdemeanors, and five sorts of malice, would enjoy in consequence various blessings in this life, bodily as well as spiritual, and in the future be born in a pleasant heavenly abode. What are those five dreadful [sins] which are to be kept away? They are: (1) killing, (2) stealing, (3) unlawful lust, (4) lying, and (5) drinking spirits."

[1. A literal translation of Samyuktâgama.

2. Here, as well as further on, five hundred Arhats are mentioned. Is this the number of the Arhats assembled in the Convocation? If so, it is in direct contradiction to the above statement that there were a thousand.

3. One edition reads eight thousand, which is probably a misprint.]

   All such matters were comprised under the Abhidharmapitaka. Thus ended the compilation of the three Dharmapitakas.

INCIDENT OF PURÂNA.

   Three[1] out of the eleven Chinese translations which contain accounts of the First Convocation refer to the episode of Purâ.na, who was in the south[2] when Mahâkâçyapa and five hundred Bhikshus were working on the compilation of the Pitaka. According to the Caturvarga-vinaya, the event occurred in the following manner:

   Having heard that the Convocation was taking place in Râjagriha, Sthavira Purâ.na hastened thither, accompanied by his party, which consisted of five hundred Bhikshus. He went to Mahâkâçyapa and asked if he also might be allowed to learn all that had happened. Mahâkâçyapa thereupon again summoned the assembly, requested Upâli to rehearse what he had recited, and had other things repeated as they had been done before. Purâ.na expressed his satisfaction with the general proceedings of the Convocation, except as to the insertion of the following eight indulgences, which had been plainly approved by Buddha, and unmistakably kept in memory by himself. The eight things were: (1) Keeping food indoors; (2) Cooking indoors; (3) Cooking of one's own accord; (4) Taking food of one's own accord; (5) Receiving food when rising early in the morning; (6) Carrying food home according to the wish of a giver; (7) Having miscellaneous fruits; (8) Eating things grown in (or by?) a pond.

   These indulgences, said he, were not against the rule that forbids the taking of the remnant of food. Mahâkâçyapa told him that he was correct in saying so, but that Buddha permitted them only on account of a scarcity of food, when the Bhikshus could not get a sufficient supply of it by going their rounds, and that therefore when this circumstance was removed, Buddha again bade them to abstain from these eight indulgences. Purâ.na, however, protested, declaring that Buddha, who was all-wise, would not permit what otherwise was forbidden, nor would he forbid what otherwise was permitted. To this Mahâkâçyapa replied: "The very reason of his being all-wise has enabled him to permit what otherwise was forbidden, and to forbid what otherwise was permitted. Purâ.na, we will now make this decision: That whatever Buddha did not forbid shall not be forbidden, and whatever Buddha forbade shall not be disregarded. Let us train ourselves in accordance with the disciplinary rules established by Buddha."

[1. The Pañcavarga-vinaya, the Caturvarga-vinaya, and the Vinaya-mâtrikâ.

2. According to the Pañcavarga-vinaya, agreeing with the Pâli.]

   The Pañcavarga-Vinaya mentions, instead of the eight above enumerated, seven indulgences which, however, may be taken for eight, according to how we punctuate the passage, though the text apparently states "these seven things." They are slightly different from those in the Caturvarga-vinaya, to-wit: (1) Keeping food indoors; (2) Cooking indoors; (3) Cooking of one's own accord; (4) Receiving food in compliance with the wish of another; (5) Taking fruit of one's own accord; (6) Receiving things coming out of a pond; (7) Eating fruit with its seeds (or stone) removed, when received from one who is not a regular attendant in the Samgha.[1]

   According to the Vinaya-mâtrikâ Sûtra, the first of the eight indulgences is the keeping of food indoors, and the last is the eating of sundry grasses and roots (or roots of grass) growing by a pond, but the six intermediate ones are not mentioned.

   Mahâkâçyapa is said to have told Purâ.na about the eight excellent qualities of Buddha, by virtue of which he could, when deemed fit, establish or abolish the rules for the benefit of the Samgha.

PLACE AND TIME.

   All the Chinese works, already referred to, agree in stating that the First Convocation took place in Râjagriha, though they differ as to the special locality of the city. The Saptapar.na Cave, the Pippala Rock, the Kshatrya Cave, and the Gridhrakûta are the places thus mentioned in them.

[1. The last passage is not clear, and we may consider it either as forming an independent statement or as an appendix to the sixth.]

   As to the time, they unanimously say that the event happened immediately after the demise of Buddha, though they in no wise agree regarding the exact date.

TEITARO SUZUKI.

Sumber: http://www.sacred-texts.com/journals/mon/1stbudcn.htm

Semoga bermanfaat.....
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #18 on: 28 February 2010, 06:11:01 PM »
 [at] Seniya:
 
Kirimannya sangat bermanfaat! Thanks a lot!

Memang ada beberapa perbedaan mengenai kronologi Konsili Agung pertama antara tradisi Theravada dan tradisi2 lainnya. Dalam tradisi Theravada, Konsili Agung pertama secara lengkap telah dijelaskan dalam Samantapāsādika dan Sumaṅgalavilasini. Sayangnya, sekarang masih sulit untuk mendapatkan terjemahan kitab ini dalam bahasa Inggris. Jika di antara teman2 yang memilikinya, ini akan sangat membantu sekali sebagai studi banding.

Sebagai tambahan.....

Btw, dalam Samantapāsādika, ada beberapa alasan mengapa Mahā Kassapa berniat untuk mengadakan Konsili. Selain karena pernyataan Bhikkhu Subaddha yang ditahbiskn ketika sudah tua (Vuḍḍhapabbajita - kata memiliki kemiripan dengan pendapat tradisi yang mengatkan bahwa nama bhikkhu ini adalah Mahallaka atau Subhadra Mahallaka karena Mahallaka juga berarti 'tua'), juga ada alasan2 lainnya. Sebagai contohnya, Mahā Kassapa ingat kata2 Sang Buddha bahwa setelh Sang Buddha meninggal, Dhamma dan Vinaya akan menjadi guru para pengikutnya. Juga ia ingat bagaimana suatu kali Sang Buddha bertukar jubah dengannya. Kejadian ini mengingatkan Mahā Kassapa bahwa ia memiliki tanggung jawab untuk melindungi ajran Sang Buddha setelha beliau meninggal.

Di artikel yang dikirim saudara Seniya ada satu alasan yang dilontarkan beberapa tradisi bahwa pelaksanaan Konsili bertujuan untuk menghindari celaan dari kaum heretics (penganut ajaran lain) bahwa Vinaya yang ditetapkan Sang Buddha tidak ubahnya asap yang dipraktikkn pengikutnya hanya ketika beliau masih hidup. Dalam tradisi Theravada, seperti yang tercatat dalam Pancasatikakkhandhaka, dikatakn bahwa alasan ini berkaitan dengan penetapan Mahā Kassapa untuk tidak melenyapkan beberapa peraturan minor (Khuddhānukhudhhasikkha).

Mengenai Bhikkhu Ānanda, Bhikkhu Māha Kassapa pada awalnya hanya menunjuk 499 arahat sebagai peserta karena beliau ingin memberikan peluang kepada bhikkhu Ānanda. Beliau berpikir bahwa tanpa dan dengan Ānanda, konsili tidak akan terlaksana. Tanpa Ānanda, konsili tidak akn terlaksana karena Ānanda adalah the treasurer of Dhamma. Tetapi jika Ānanda bergabung beliau belum mencapai kesucian Arahat padahal ada ribuan bhikkhu lainnya yang sudah mencapai arahat. Jika Mahā Kassapa menunjuk Ananda sebagai salah satu partisipan Konsili, nanti akan ada banyak kritik dari bhikkhu2 lain. Oleh karena, hanya setelah bhikkhu2 lain meminta beliau untuk mengikut-sertakan Ananda, beliau kemudian menunjuknya. Dan Ananda dikatakn berusaha mempraktikkan praktik yang keras untuk mencapai kesucian arahat karena beliau disindir oleh seorang arahat dalam sebuah pertemuan sehari sebelum konsili berlangsung bahwa ada seseorang (yakni beliau) di antara bhikkhu2 yang berkumpul yang masih berbau daging mentah.  Selain itu berbeda dari beberapa tradisi lainnya, tradisi Theravada hanya mencatat 6 kesalahan Bhikkhu Ānanda yang beliau lakukan sebelum dan sesudah Sang BUddha parinibbāna dan harus diakui ketika Konsili Agung pertama berlangsung.

Berhubungan dengan Bhikkhu Gavampati, Theravāda memang tidak mencatat tentang bagaimana Gavampati diundang untuk menghadiri Konsili ketika beliau berdiam di alam Sorga. Namun demikian, tradisi Theravada juga mencatat tentang kebiasaan bhikkhu Gavampati untuk bermeditasi di alam Sorga.

Berkaitan dengan Bhikkhu Purana, tradisi Theravada hanya mencatat bahwa beliau datang ketika Konsili telah selesai dan beliau mengatakan bahwa terlepas dari apapun keputusan yang ada di Konsili itu, beliau hanya berpegang pada ajaran yang beliau sendiri dengar langsung dari Sang BUddha.

Be happy!

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #19 on: 28 February 2010, 06:32:13 PM »
 [at] Peacemind:
Sama2, bro, memang menarik sekali kalau bisa membandingkan persamaan dan perbedaan kisah Konsili Pertama menurut tradisi2 Buddhis awal......

Soal Bhikkhu Purana yang kembali setelah Konsili Pertama selesai dan memiliki versi Vinaya sendiri soal beberapa peraturan kecil, apakah ini menunjukkan awal perbedaan pendapat tentang Vinaya yang menyebabkan perpecahan Sangha pada masa2 berikutnya seperti pada Konsili Kedua dst?

Kemudian aoakah perpecahan Sangha menjadi berbagai aliran mulanya hanya perbedaan pada Vinaya, seperti pada Konsili Kedua di mana sekelompok bhikkhu Vajji melakukan 10 perbuatan yang melanggar Vinaya yang telah ditetapkan dalam Konsili Pertama dikeluarkan dari kelompok Sangha awal dan membentuk kelompok Sangha sendiri (Mahasanghika)?
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #20 on: 28 February 2010, 07:00:41 PM »
[at] Peacemind:
Sama2, bro, memang menarik sekali kalau bisa membandingkan persamaan dan perbedaan kisah Konsili Pertama menurut tradisi2 Buddhis awal......

Soal Bhikkhu Purana yang kembali setelah Konsili Pertama selesai dan memiliki versi Vinaya sendiri soal beberapa peraturan kecil, apakah ini menunjukkan awal perbedaan pendapat tentang Vinaya yang menyebabkan perpecahan Sangha pada masa2 berikutnya seperti pada Konsili Kedua dst?

Kemudian aoakah perpecahan Sangha menjadi berbagai aliran mulanya hanya perbedaan pada Vinaya, seperti pada Konsili Kedua di mana sekelompok bhikkhu Vajji melakukan 10 perbuatan yang melanggar Vinaya yang telah ditetapkan dalam Konsili Pertama dikeluarkan dari kelompok Sangha awal dan membentuk kelompok Sangha sendiri (Mahasanghika)?

Meskipun tradisi Theravada tidak mencantumkan persoalan vinaya antara bhikkhu Purana dan keputusan konsili pertama, ada beberapa sarjana Buddhist yang berpendapat demikian, bahwa kejadian ini merupakan semacam bibit perpecahan / lebih tepatnya perbedaan pendapat  di antara komunitas para bhikkhu.

Berkaitan dengan perpecahan yang terjadi di konsili kedua yng mengakibatkan perpecahan Sangha kedalam dua kelompok, tradisi theravada hanya berpatokan pada perbedaan 10 peraturan yang diimplementasikan oleh para bhikkhu dari Vajji. Namun demikian,vasumitra dan vinitadewa dari Sarvastivada mengatakn bahwa perpecahan ini disebabkan karena 5 pendapat Mahādewa yang menunjukkn kelemahan para arahat. Dikatakn Mahadewa  bahwa arahat masih memiliki nafsu birahi (rāga), kebodohan, keragu-raguan, harus mencapai araht atas bantuan orang lain, dan mencapai kearahatan dengan berteriak 'aho'.  Jadi sementara tradisi Theravada mengatakn perpecahan Sangha semata-mata karena alasan Vinaya, tradisi lain berpendapat bahwa karena filsafat yang berbeda perpecahan terjadi dalam Sangha.

Be happy!

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #21 on: 28 February 2010, 07:07:10 PM »
bukankah ada kontrak antara Sang Buddha dan Ananda, bahwa segala sesuatu yang dibabarkan oleh Sang Buddha kepada orang lain yg tanpa sepengetahuan Ananda maka Sang Buddha harus mengulangi lagi untuk Ananda. Jika ada Ajaran yg dibabarkan kepada orang lain yg tidak diulangi untuk Ananda, ini berarti Sang Buddha melanggar kontrak, apakah mungkin?

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #22 on: 28 February 2010, 07:51:12 PM »
bukankah ada kontrak antara Sang Buddha dan Ananda, bahwa segala sesuatu yang dibabarkan oleh Sang Buddha kepada orang lain yg tanpa sepengetahuan Ananda maka Sang Buddha harus mengulangi lagi untuk Ananda. Jika ada Ajaran yg dibabarkan kepada orang lain yg tidak diulangi untuk Ananda, ini berarti Sang Buddha melanggar kontrak, apakah mungkin?

Saya sebenarnya masih kurang jelas mengenai kontrak ini. Kita tahu bahwa bhikkhu Ānanda diminta sebagai pembantu utama Sang Buddha, 20 tahun setelah pencapaian Sammāsambuddha sang Buddha. Artinya, kontrak ini ditetapkan 20 tahun setelh Sang Buddha mencapai penerangan sempurna. Jika kontrak ini mengacu kepada semua khotbah Sang Buddha sejak beliau mencapai penerangan sempurna, berarti Sang BUddha harus mengulangi semua khotbah beliau termasuk khotbah2 20 tahun sebelumnya yang Sang Buddha belum babarkan ke bhikkhu Ānanda. Selama 20 tahun sebelum Bhikkhu Ānanda menjadi pembantu utama, tentu banyak khotbah yang beliau belum pernah dengar karena tidak terus menerus beliau bersama-sama Sang Buddha. Kalau khotbahnya sedikit, mungkin Sang Buddha bisa mengulangi ke Bhikkhu Ānanda. Coba kalau selama 20 tahun itu, banyak sekali khotbah2 yang bhikkhu Ānanda belum pernah mendengar, pertanyaanya apakah Sang BUddha memiliki waktu untuk mengulangi semua. Mungkin ada pendapat dari teman2 di sini.

Offline bond

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.666
  • Reputasi: 189
  • Buddhang Saranam Gacchami...
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #23 on: 28 February 2010, 07:55:01 PM »
 [at]  Samanera Peacemind.

Apa yg saya pernah dengar , Bhikkhu Purana adalah juga seorang arahat...benarkah demikian..(menurut versi theravada)?
« Last Edit: 28 February 2010, 07:57:11 PM by bond »
Natthi me saranam annam, Buddho me saranam varam, Etena saccavajjena, Sotthi te hotu sabbada

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #24 on: 28 February 2010, 08:06:44 PM »
[at]  Samanera Peacemind.

Apa yg saya pernah dengar , Bhikkhu Purana adalah juga seorang arahat...benarkah demikian..(menurut versi theravada)?

Menurut Malalasekera dalam Dictionary of Pali Proper Names, mengutip pernyataan Samyuttanikāya Atthakatha, Vol. iii, 215, Bhikkhu Puraṇa masih seorang Sotapanna.

Offline Riky_dave

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 4.229
  • Reputasi: -14
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #25 on: 28 February 2010, 08:08:18 PM »
:)
Langkah pertama adalah langkah yg terakhir...

Offline bond

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.666
  • Reputasi: 189
  • Buddhang Saranam Gacchami...
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #26 on: 28 February 2010, 08:10:15 PM »
[at]  Samanera Peacemind.

Apa yg saya pernah dengar , Bhikkhu Purana adalah juga seorang arahat...benarkah demikian..(menurut versi theravada)?

Menurut Malalasekera dalam Dictionary of Pali Proper Names, mengutip pernyataan Samyuttanikāya Atthakatha, Vol. iii, 215, Bhikkhu Puraṇa masih seorang Sotapanna.

Terima kasih Samanera untuk konfirmasinya.  _/\_
Natthi me saranam annam, Buddho me saranam varam, Etena saccavajjena, Sotthi te hotu sabbada

Offline Riky_dave

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 4.229
  • Reputasi: -14
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #27 on: 28 February 2010, 08:13:09 PM »
Mungkin tidak bahwa seorang Arahatta mengucapkan kalimat kasar?Koq jadi berbanding ya...??
Langkah pertama adalah langkah yg terakhir...

Offline Riky_dave

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 4.229
  • Reputasi: -14
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #28 on: 28 February 2010, 08:15:33 PM »
Nanya sekalian Soal Dhammacakkapavatana Sutta[Khotbah pertama SB],,,

Apakah "valid" dikatakan sebagai "khotbah pertama"?padahal sebelum menuju ke 5 pertapa,Buddha bertemu dengan seorang pertapa dan pertapa itu menanyakan ,"Siapa Buddha,Guru Buddha siapa"..Buddha menjawab,"Saya adalah yang telah mencapai Penerangan Sempurna.."
Ketika hal tersebut terjadi,si petapa menjawab,"Mungkin ya,mungkin tidak.." dan pergi berlalu begitu saja,apakah ini bisa dikategorikan bahwa Buddha gagal dalam Khotbah "pertama" nya kepada petapa tersebut??

Saya juga tertarik dengan Sangha Agung 1 dan seterusnya,ada yang memiliki "sejarah"nya dan linknya?boleh saya minta untuk dibaca?

Anumodana _/\_
Langkah pertama adalah langkah yg terakhir...

Offline bond

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.666
  • Reputasi: 189
  • Buddhang Saranam Gacchami...
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #29 on: 28 February 2010, 08:18:05 PM »
 [at] Samanera Peacemind

Saya mau tanya lagi apakah Samyutanikaya atthakata itu termasuk kitab komentar?, yang saya tau itu adalah kitab komentar CMIIW
Jika ya....apakah dalam sutta ada menyebutkan tingkat kesucian Bhikkhu Purana ini selain samyutanikaya atthakata?
« Last Edit: 28 February 2010, 08:39:04 PM by bond »
Natthi me saranam annam, Buddho me saranam varam, Etena saccavajjena, Sotthi te hotu sabbada

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #30 on: 28 February 2010, 08:36:47 PM »
Nanya sekalian Soal Dhammacakkapavatana Sutta[Khotbah pertama SB],,,

Apakah "valid" dikatakan sebagai "khotbah pertama"?padahal sebelum menuju ke 5 pertapa,Buddha bertemu dengan seorang pertapa dan pertapa itu menanyakan ,"Siapa Buddha,Guru Buddha siapa"..Buddha menjawab,"Saya adalah yang telah mencapai Penerangan Sempurna.."
Ketika hal tersebut terjadi,si petapa menjawab,"Mungkin ya,mungkin tidak.." dan pergi berlalu begitu saja,apakah ini bisa dikategorikan bahwa Buddha gagal dalam Khotbah "pertama" nya kepada petapa tersebut??

Anumodana _/\_

Pernyataan Sang Buddha kepada pengembara Ajivaka bernama Upaka tidak bisa dikatakn sebagai sutta karena di sana hanya berisi sapaan umum. Sutta artinya khotbah. Dalam pertemuan ini, Sang BUddha tidak membabarkan khotbah ke Upaka. Perlu dicatat bahwa dalam kitab Komentar, pengembara Upaka yang setelah pertemuanya dengan Sang Buddha akhirnya menikah dengan seorang gadis bernama Capa dan memilki seorang putra bernama Subhadda, akhirnya datang ke Sang Buddha, meminta ditahbis sebagai seorang bhikkhu dan mencapai kesucian Anagami.

 Meskipun Dhammacakkappavattanasuttad pada umumnya dikatakan sebagai khotbah pertama Sang Buddha, dalam Sumaṅgalavilasīnī dikatakn bahwa sabda pertama Sang BUddha bukanlah Dhammacakkappavattanasutta, namun menurut tradisi theravāda adalah seruan kebahagiaan beliau setelah mencapai penerangan sempurna, sebagai berikut:

"‘‘Anekajātisaṃsāraṃ, sandhāvissaṃ anibbisaṃ;

Gahakāraṃ gavesanto, dukkhā jāti punappunaṃ.

Gahakāraka diṭṭhosi, puna gehaṃ na kāhasi;

Sabbā te phāsukā bhaggā, gahakūṭaṃ visaṅkhataṃ;

Visaṅkhāragataṃ cittaṃ, taṇhānaṃ khayamajjhagā’’ti.


Namun tradisi lain mengatakan bahwa sabda Sang Buddha pertama diucapkan ketika beliau duduk di bawah pohon Bodhi, minggu pertama setelah mencapai penerangan sempurna yakni:

‘‘Yadā have pātubhavanti dhammā;

Ātāpino jhāyato brāhmaṇassa;

Athassa kaṅkhā vapayanti sabbā;

Yato pajānāti sahetudhamma’’nti.


Be happy!

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #31 on: 28 February 2010, 08:39:07 PM »
[at] Samanera Peacemind

Saya mau tanya lagi apakah Samyutanikaya atthakata itu termasuk kitab komentar?, yang saya tau itu adalah kitab komentar CMIIW
Jika ya....apakah dalam sutta ada menyebutkan tingkat kesucian Bhikkhu Purana ini?


Samyuttanikāya Atthakathā adalh kitab komentar dari Samyuttanikāya. Nama aslinya adalh Saratappakasini. Dalam Sutta, kita tidak mendaptkn referensi kesucian bhikkhu Puraṇa.

Be happy.

Offline bond

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.666
  • Reputasi: 189
  • Buddhang Saranam Gacchami...
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #32 on: 28 February 2010, 08:41:26 PM »
[at] Samanera Peacemind

Saya mau tanya lagi apakah Samyutanikaya atthakata itu termasuk kitab komentar?, yang saya tau itu adalah kitab komentar CMIIW
Jika ya....apakah dalam sutta ada menyebutkan tingkat kesucian Bhikkhu Purana ini?


Samyuttanikāya Atthakathā adalh kitab komentar dari Samyuttanikāya. Nama aslinya adalh Saratappakasini. Dalam Sutta, kita tidak mendaptkn referensi kesucian bhikkhu Puraṇa.

Be happy.

Anumodana atas penjelasan Samanera .

Mettacitena.
_/\_
Natthi me saranam annam, Buddho me saranam varam, Etena saccavajjena, Sotthi te hotu sabbada

Offline Riky_dave

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 4.229
  • Reputasi: -14
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #33 on: 28 February 2010, 08:57:42 PM »
Nanya sekalian Soal Dhammacakkapavatana Sutta[Khotbah pertama SB],,,

Apakah "valid" dikatakan sebagai "khotbah pertama"?padahal sebelum menuju ke 5 pertapa,Buddha bertemu dengan seorang pertapa dan pertapa itu menanyakan ,"Siapa Buddha,Guru Buddha siapa"..Buddha menjawab,"Saya adalah yang telah mencapai Penerangan Sempurna.."
Ketika hal tersebut terjadi,si petapa menjawab,"Mungkin ya,mungkin tidak.." dan pergi berlalu begitu saja,apakah ini bisa dikategorikan bahwa Buddha gagal dalam Khotbah "pertama" nya kepada petapa tersebut??

Anumodana _/\_

Pernyataan Sang Buddha kepada pengembara Ajivaka bernama Upaka tidak bisa dikatakn sebagai sutta karena di sana hanya berisi sapaan umum. Sutta artinya khotbah. Dalam pertemuan ini, Sang BUddha tidak membabarkan khotbah ke Upaka. Perlu dicatat bahwa dalam kitab Komentar, pengembara Upaka yang setelah pertemuanya dengan Sang Buddha akhirnya menikah dengan seorang gadis bernama Capa dan memilki seorang putra bernama Subhadda, akhirnya datang ke Sang Buddha, meminta ditahbis sebagai seorang bhikkhu dan mencapai kesucian Anagami.

 Meskipun Dhammacakkappavattanasuttad pada umumnya dikatakan sebagai khotbah pertama Sang Buddha, dalam Sumaṅgalavilasīnī dikatakn bahwa sabda pertama Sang BUddha bukanlah Dhammacakkappavattanasutta, namun menurut tradisi theravāda adalah seruan kebahagiaan beliau setelah mencapai penerangan sempurna, sebagai berikut:

"‘‘Anekajātisaṃsāraṃ, sandhāvissaṃ anibbisaṃ;

Gahakāraṃ gavesanto, dukkhā jāti punappunaṃ.

Gahakāraka diṭṭhosi, puna gehaṃ na kāhasi;

Sabbā te phāsukā bhaggā, gahakūṭaṃ visaṅkhataṃ;

Visaṅkhāragataṃ cittaṃ, taṇhānaṃ khayamajjhagā’’ti.


Namun tradisi lain mengatakan bahwa sabda Sang Buddha pertama diucapkan ketika beliau duduk di bawah pohon Bodhi, minggu pertama setelah mencapai penerangan sempurna yakni:

‘‘Yadā have pātubhavanti dhammā;

Ātāpino jhāyato brāhmaṇassa;

Athassa kaṅkhā vapayanti sabbā;

Yato pajānāti sahetudhamma’’nti.


Be happy!

Bagaimana dengan syair2 yang membawa pada pencerahan dalam Dhammapada Atthakatha?

Mohon bantuan penerjemahan bahasa Pali tersebut dan kalau mau belajar bahasa Pali gimana caranya ya?atau ada bukunya atau rujukannya?

Anumodana _/\_
Langkah pertama adalah langkah yg terakhir...

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #34 on: 28 February 2010, 09:00:10 PM »
 [at] peacemind:
Thx atas infony,ttg Mahadeva jg pernah bc,kalau tdk salah dlm terjemahan Xuanzang dr Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra milik Sarvastivada yg judulny "Sin of Mahadeva".

Tetapi ad hal yg menarik ttg Mahadeva: dlm Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra Mahadeva adl bhikkhu yg hidup d zaman Asoka,sedangkan dlm tradisi Pali kt mengenal seorg bhikkhu Arahat bernama Mahadeva yg dkirim sbg salah satu dhammaduta oleh Tissa Mogaliputta pd masa Asoka spt yg kt ketahui dlm Mahavamsa.

Berdasarkan hal ini dlm buku Sect and Sectarianism (penulisny seorg bhikkhu tp lupa namany,bs dgoogling & ddownload pdf-ny) menyimpulkan bhw Mahadeva dlm Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra yg dkisahkan penuh "dosa" krn melakukan incest dg ibuny,membunuh ayah & ibuny,membunuh seorg Arahat,bkn tokoh historis melainkan tokoh fiktif yg dbuat kaum Sarvastivada utk merendahkan silsilah kebhikkhuan & ajaran aliran Mahasanghika yg berasal dr Mahadeva. Lima poin Mahadeva yg menjd pokok perdebatan antara Mahasanghika dg aliran lain yg mendukung cita2 Kearahatan sendiri kt temukan dlm Kathavatthu Pali dmana ajaran tsb dsanggah & tdk dsebutkn siapa pencetusny hny dkatakan dianut oleh kaum Mahasanghika.

Oleh sebab itu,mnrt buku tsb,Mahadeva dlm Mahavamsa walaupun tdk ad hubunganny dg Mahadeva dlm Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra kemungkinan mrpk penyebab berdiriny aliran Mahasanghika (atau yg lain,sy lupa namany) d daerah d mana ia dkirim sbg dhammaduta. Perbedaan geografis lah yg menyebabkn timbulny aliran baru d wilayah baru,yaitu krn menyesuaikan dg tradisi & budaya setempat mk timbul perbedaan penerapan Vinaya,jd bkn krn ad perpecahan Sangha pd masa Konsili Kedua atau sesudahny. Kisah2 perpecahan Sangha mnrt bk tsb kemungkinan dbuat2 oleh para pengikut aliran2 tsb yg belakangan utk menunjukkan bhw Sangha mrk lah paling murni silsilah penahbisan, Vinaya, & Dhamma ny.

Cth lain adl dlm tradisi Theravada dkatakan Mahasanghika berasal dr silsilah bhikkhu Vajji dr Vesali yg dkucilkan dlm Konsili Kedua. Mnrt bk tsb,sebenarny Mahasanghika bkn berasal dr bhikkhu Vajji yg melanggar Vinaya krn kt tdk pernah mendengar kelanjutan para bhikkhu tsb stlh Konsili II dan perpecahan aliran muncul paling awal pd ms Konsili III pd ms Asoka.

Intiny bk Sect & Sectarianism berusaha meredakan ketegangan sektarian dlm agama Buddha dg menganalisa & membandingkan berbagai versi kisah perpecahan Sangha dr berbagai aliran Buddhis awal. Dr sini dsimpulkan bhw tdk ad yg namany perpecahan Sangha awal mula mnjd berbagai kelompok yg menjd aliran br baik krn perbedaan Vinaya ataupun Dhamma,tetapi isolasi geografis akibat penyebaran ajaran Buddha k berbagai wilayah yg luas pd ms Asoka menyebabkn terputusny komunikasi antara bhikkhu dhammaduta tsb dg Sangha pusat d Pataliputta & seiring perkembangan wkt para bhikkhu tsb menyesuaikan Vinaya agar bs djalankan sesuai dg tradisi setempat. Para muridny dtahbiskan kemudian mengikuti Vinaya tsb mengembangkan tradisi/aliran br yg berbeda dg tradisi awal d pusat. Demikian jg,mnrt sy,tradisi Theravada adl hasil isolasi geografis yg dmkian jg stlh bhikkhu Mahinda membw ajaran Buddha k Srilangka.

 [at] indra:
Soal Ananda kayakny gak mgkn Buddha punya wkt utk mengulangi semua kotbah selama 20 th seb Ananda jd pembantu tetap. Ttp mgkn Buddha hny mengulang kpd Ananda kotbah2 yg dianggap penting saja spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dst yg diakui semua aliran baik Mahayana maupun Theravada. Kemungkinan sutra2 Mahayana atau aliran lain yg tdk ad pd smua aliran Buddhis awal tdk diulang kpd Ananda melainkan dberikan kpd murid lain yg kemudian dwarisi dlm tradisi tertentu yg menganggapny jg diingat Ananda krn ia adl pengulang sutta dlm Konsili I.
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #35 on: 28 February 2010, 09:01:55 PM »
 [at] peacemind:
Thx atas infony,ttg Mahadeva jg pernah bc,kalau tdk salah dlm terjemahan Xuanzang dr Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra milik Sarvastivada yg judulny "Sin of Mahadeva".

Tetapi ad hal yg menarik ttg Mahadeva: dlm Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra Mahadeva adl bhikkhu yg hidup d zaman Asoka,sedangkan dlm tradisi Pali kt mengenal seorg bhikkhu Arahat bernama Mahadeva yg dkirim sbg salah satu dhammaduta oleh Tissa Mogaliputta pd masa Asoka spt yg kt ketahui dlm Mahavamsa.

Berdasarkan hal ini dlm buku Sect and Sectarianism (penulisny seorg bhikkhu tp lupa namany,bs dgoogling & ddownload pdf-ny) menyimpulkan bhw Mahadeva dlm Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra yg dkisahkan penuh "dosa" krn melakukan incest dg ibuny,membunuh ayah & ibuny,membunuh seorg Arahat,bkn tokoh historis melainkan tokoh fiktif yg dbuat kaum Sarvastivada utk merendahkan silsilah kebhikkhuan & ajaran aliran Mahasanghika yg berasal dr Mahadeva. Lima poin Mahadeva yg menjd pokok perdebatan antara Mahasanghika dg aliran lain yg mendukung cita2 Kearahatan sendiri kt temukan dlm Kathavatthu Pali dmana ajaran tsb dsanggah & tdk dsebutkn siapa pencetusny hny dkatakan dianut oleh kaum Mahasanghika.

Oleh sebab itu,mnrt buku tsb,Mahadeva dlm Mahavamsa walaupun tdk ad hubunganny dg Mahadeva dlm Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra kemungkinan mrpk penyebab berdiriny aliran Mahasanghika (atau yg lain,sy lupa namany) d daerah d mana ia dkirim sbg dhammaduta. Perbedaan geografis lah yg menyebabkn timbulny aliran baru d wilayah baru,yaitu krn menyesuaikan dg tradisi & budaya setempat mk timbul perbedaan penerapan Vinaya,jd bkn krn ad perpecahan Sangha pd masa Konsili Kedua atau sesudahny. Kisah2 perpecahan Sangha mnrt bk tsb kemungkinan dbuat2 oleh para pengikut aliran2 tsb yg belakangan utk menunjukkan bhw Sangha mrk lah paling murni silsilah penahbisan, Vinaya, & Dhamma ny.

Cth lain adl dlm tradisi Theravada dkatakan Mahasanghika berasal dr silsilah bhikkhu Vajji dr Vesali yg dkucilkan dlm Konsili Kedua. Mnrt bk tsb,sebenarny Mahasanghika bkn berasal dr bhikkhu Vajji yg melanggar Vinaya krn kt tdk pernah mendengar kelanjutan para bhikkhu tsb stlh Konsili II dan perpecahan aliran muncul paling awal pd ms Konsili III pd ms Asoka.

Intiny bk Sect & Sectarianism berusaha meredakan ketegangan sektarian dlm agama Buddha dg menganalisa & membandingkan berbagai versi kisah perpecahan Sangha dr berbagai aliran Buddhis awal. Dr sini dsimpulkan bhw tdk ad yg namany perpecahan Sangha awal mula mnjd berbagai kelompok yg menjd aliran br baik krn perbedaan Vinaya ataupun Dhamma,tetapi isolasi geografis akibat penyebaran ajaran Buddha k berbagai wilayah yg luas pd ms Asoka menyebabkn terputusny komunikasi antara bhikkhu dhammaduta tsb dg Sangha pusat d Pataliputta & seiring perkembangan wkt para bhikkhu tsb menyesuaikan Vinaya agar bs djalankan sesuai dg tradisi setempat. Para muridny dtahbiskan kemudian mengikuti Vinaya tsb mengembangkan tradisi/aliran br yg berbeda dg tradisi awal d pusat. Demikian jg,mnrt sy,tradisi Theravada adl hasil isolasi geografis yg dmkian jg stlh bhikkhu Mahinda membw ajaran Buddha k Srilangka.

 [at] indra:
Soal Ananda kayakny gak mgkn Buddha punya wkt utk mengulangi semua kotbah selama 20 th seb Ananda jd pembantu tetap. Ttp mgkn Buddha hny mengulang kpd Ananda kotbah2 yg dianggap penting saja spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dst yg diakui semua aliran baik Mahayana maupun Theravada. Kemungkinan sutra2 Mahayana atau aliran lain yg tdk ad pd smua aliran Buddhis awal tdk diulang kpd Ananda melainkan dberikan kpd murid lain yg kemudian dwarisi dlm tradisi tertentu yg menganggapny jg diingat Ananda krn ia adl pengulang sutta dlm Konsili I.
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #36 on: 28 February 2010, 10:03:26 PM »
bukankah ada kontrak antara Sang Buddha dan Ananda, bahwa segala sesuatu yang dibabarkan oleh Sang Buddha kepada orang lain yg tanpa sepengetahuan Ananda maka Sang Buddha harus mengulangi lagi untuk Ananda. Jika ada Ajaran yg dibabarkan kepada orang lain yg tidak diulangi untuk Ananda, ini berarti Sang Buddha melanggar kontrak, apakah mungkin?

Saya sebenarnya masih kurang jelas mengenai kontrak ini. Kita tahu bahwa bhikkhu Ānanda diminta sebagai pembantu utama Sang Buddha, 20 tahun setelah pencapaian Sammāsambuddha sang Buddha. Artinya, kontrak ini ditetapkan 20 tahun setelh Sang Buddha mencapai penerangan sempurna. Jika kontrak ini mengacu kepada semua khotbah Sang Buddha sejak beliau mencapai penerangan sempurna, berarti Sang BUddha harus mengulangi semua khotbah beliau termasuk khotbah2 20 tahun sebelumnya yang Sang Buddha belum babarkan ke bhikkhu Ānanda. Selama 20 tahun sebelum Bhikkhu Ānanda menjadi pembantu utama, tentu banyak khotbah yang beliau belum pernah dengar karena tidak terus menerus beliau bersama-sama Sang Buddha. Kalau khotbahnya sedikit, mungkin Sang Buddha bisa mengulangi ke Bhikkhu Ānanda. Coba kalau selama 20 tahun itu, banyak sekali khotbah2 yang bhikkhu Ānanda belum pernah mendengar, pertanyaanya apakah Sang BUddha memiliki waktu untuk mengulangi semua. Mungkin ada pendapat dari teman2 di sini.

Bagaimana dengan contoh Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta?

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #37 on: 28 February 2010, 10:14:26 PM »
 [at] Seniya: Thanks a lot untuk informasinya.

[at] peacemind:
Thx atas infony,ttg Mahadeva jg pernah bc,kalau tdk salah dlm terjemahan Xuanzang dr Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra milik Sarvastivada yg judulny "Sin of Mahadeva".

 Lima poin Mahadeva yg menjd pokok perdebatan antara Mahasanghika dg aliran lain yg mendukung cita2 Kearahatan sendiri kt temukan dlm Kathavatthu Pali dmana ajaran tsb dsanggah & tdk dsebutkn siapa pencetusny hny dkatakan dianut oleh kaum Mahasanghika.

Benar sekali.

Quote
Oleh sebab itu,mnrt buku tsb,Mahadeva dlm Mahavamsa walaupun tdk ad hubunganny dg Mahadeva dlm Abhidharma-vibhasa-sastra kemungkinan mrpk penyebab berdiriny aliran Mahasanghika (atau yg lain,sy lupa namany) d daerah d mana ia dkirim sbg dhammaduta. Perbedaan geografis lah yg menyebabkn timbulny aliran baru d wilayah baru,yaitu krn menyesuaikan dg tradisi & budaya setempat mk timbul perbedaan penerapan Vinaya,jd bkn krn ad perpecahan Sangha pd masa Konsili Kedua atau sesudahny. Kisah2 perpecahan Sangha mnrt bk tsb kemungkinan dbuat2 oleh para pengikut aliran2 tsb yg belakangan utk menunjukkan bhw Sangha mrk lah paling murni silsilah penahbisan, Vinaya, & Dhamma ny.

Bhikkhu Mahādewa telah dikirim ke Mahimsakamaṇḍala untuk penyebaran ajaran Buddha. Sejauh Tradisi Theravāda memandang, bhikkhu ini berbeda dari Mahādewa yang memegang lima poin mengenai arahat. Alasannya, Mahādewa yang dikirim ke Mahimsakamaṇḍala hidup pada jaman Asoka di mana waktu itu Mahasanghika sudah berkembang. Di samping itu dengan disisipkannya 5 poin yang persis sama dengan poin2 Mahadewa di dalam Kathavatthu, buku yang disusun pada konsili ketiga ini, menunjukkn bahwa pandangan ini bukan milik Mahādewa yang dikirim setelh konsili ketiga ini pada jaman Asoka. Sementara itu, Mahādewa yang memegang lima poin ini hidup pada konsili ke dua dan merupakan pro-Mahasanghika. Alasan kedua, sangat jelas bahwa Mahādewa adalah Theravadin yang juga merupakan arahat.
[/quote]

Quote
Cth lain adl dlm tradisi Theravada dkatakan Mahasanghika berasal dr silsilah bhikkhu Vajji dr Vesali yg dkucilkan dlm Konsili Kedua. Mnrt bk tsb,sebenarny Mahasanghika bkn berasal dr bhikkhu Vajji yg melanggar Vinaya krn kt tdk pernah mendengar kelanjutan para bhikkhu tsb stlh Konsili II dan perpecahan aliran muncul paling awal pd ms Konsili III pd ms Asoka.

 Yap mungkin tradisi lain berpendapat demikian. Tapi Theravāda memang menganggap bahwa Mahāsaṅghika adalah kumpulan para bhikkhu yang tidak puas dengak konsili kedua yang diadakn oleh para Theras. Mereka membentuk konsili sendiri yang berjumlah 10.000 bhikkhu dan mendirikan sekte Mahasanghika.

Quote
Intiny bk Sect & Sectarianism berusaha meredakan ketegangan sektarian dlm agama Buddha dg menganalisa & membandingkan berbagai versi kisah perpecahan Sangha dr berbagai aliran Buddhis awal. Dr sini dsimpulkan bhw tdk ad yg namany perpecahan Sangha awal mula mnjd berbagai kelompok yg menjd aliran br baik krn perbedaan Vinaya ataupun Dhamma,tetapi isolasi geografis akibat penyebaran ajaran Buddha k berbagai wilayah yg luas pd ms Asoka menyebabkn terputusny komunikasi antara bhikkhu dhammaduta tsb dg Sangha pusat d Pataliputta & seiring perkembangan wkt para bhikkhu tsb menyesuaikan Vinaya agar bs djalankan sesuai dg tradisi setempat. Para muridny dtahbiskan kemudian mengikuti Vinaya tsb mengembangkan tradisi/aliran br yg berbeda dg tradisi awal d pusat. Demikian jg,mnrt sy,tradisi Theravada adl hasil isolasi geografis yg dmkian jg stlh bhikkhu Mahinda membw ajaran Buddha k Srilangka.

Yap,interprestasi demikian bisa saja benar. Tapi dari buku2 yang ada baik dari Theravada dan tradisi2 lain sperti Sarvastivada mengungkapkan perpecahan tersebut karena perbedaan Vinaya atau Dhamma di antara para bhikkhu, dan bukan karena isolasi geografis.  Anyway, memang masalah ini masih perlu dipelajari dan interprestasi yang saudara Seniya berikan juga bisa dijadikan bahan pertimbangan.

Be happy.


Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #38 on: 28 February 2010, 10:15:33 PM »
[at] indra:
Soal Ananda kayakny gak mgkn Buddha punya wkt utk mengulangi semua kotbah selama 20 th seb Ananda jd pembantu tetap. Ttp mgkn Buddha hny mengulang kpd Ananda kotbah2 yg dianggap penting saja spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dst yg diakui semua aliran baik Mahayana maupun Theravada. Kemungkinan sutra2 Mahayana atau aliran lain yg tdk ad pd smua aliran Buddhis awal tdk diulang kpd Ananda melainkan dberikan kpd murid lain yg kemudian dwarisi dlm tradisi tertentu yg menganggapny jg diingat Ananda krn ia adl pengulang sutta dlm Konsili I.

yg menganggap gak mungkin kan anda, Sang Buddha disebutkan memiliki kemampuan2 luar biasa antara lain, berbicara lebih cepat dari kecepatan manusia normal, dlsb, dan juga mengenai kontrak, saya tidak percaya Sang Buddha melanggar janjinya kepada Ananda. Sang Buddha bahkan menepati janjinya kepada Mara.

baiklah, coba kita pakai skenario anda, bahwa mungkin Sang Buddha tidak mengulangi apa yang dianggap tidak penting, tetapi IMO suatu khotbah yang kelak dapat memicu perpecahan tentu saja adalah khotbah yang penting.

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #39 on: 28 February 2010, 10:29:20 PM »
 [at] Riky:

"‘‘Anekajātisaṃsāraṃ, sandhāvissaṃ anibbisaṃ;
Gahakāraṃ gavesanto, dukkhā jāti punappunaṃ."

"Gahakāraka diṭṭhosi, puna gehaṃ na kāhasi;
Sabbā te phāsukā bhaggā, gahakūṭaṃ visaṅkhataṃ;
Visaṅkhāragataṃ cittaṃ, taṇhānaṃ khayamajjhagā’’ti."

"Melalui banyak kelahiran, aku mengembara di alam samsara,
mencari tapi tidak menemukan, pembuat rumah ini.
Penderitaan adalah kelahiran yang terus menerus."

"Oh, pembuat rumah, engkau telah terlihat.
Engkau tidak akan membuat rumah lagi.
Semua usukmu telah kuhancurkan, tiangmu telah roboh.
Batinku telah mencapai tanpa kondisi,
akhir nafsu telah kucapai".

‘‘Yadā have pātubhavanti dhammā;
Ātāpino jhāyato brāhmaṇassa;
Athassa kaṅkhā vapayanti sabbā;
Yato pajānāti sahetudhamma’’nti.

"Ketika semua dhamma tampak jelas,
kepada seorang brahmana yang serius
dalam meditasi, semua keragu-raguannya
lenyap di mana ia mengetahui bahwa  segala sesuatu
muncul karena sebab".
 
Be happy!





Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #40 on: 28 February 2010, 11:15:50 PM »
Bagaimana dengan contoh Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta?

Tidak tahu apakah Dhammacakkappavattanasutta dibabarkan kembali ke  Ananda ataukah tidak, namun jika kita melihat Ariyapariyesanasutta ketika Sang Buddha berkhotbah ke sekelompok bhikkhu yang mana Bhikkhu Ananda juga hadir, Sang BUddha menceritakan tentang pertemuannya dengan Lima bhikkhu dan membabarkan khotbah pertamanya kepada mereka.

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #41 on: 01 March 2010, 01:34:30 PM »
 [at] peacemind:
Thx ats koreksi & tmbhn infony. Sy pribadi tdk terikat pd label tradisi/aliran tertentu dlm Buddhisme,ttp memandang bhw sejauh msh mengajarkan 4 Kesunyataan Mulia,Jalan Mulia Berunsur 8,3 Corak Umum,12 Sebab Musabab yg saling bergantungan,hukum karma,kelahiran kembali,dst mk aliran tsb msh bgn dr Buddhisme (wlaupn sbg putthujana tdk pny kemampuan batin membdkan mana ajaran yg bnr2 dberikan Buddha atau tdk)
Soal perpecahan aliran membuat sy bingung krn kalau membaca kitab berbagai aliran,msg2 menyatakan diriny paling sesuai dg tradisi/ajaran asli. Sampai sy menemukan bk Sect & Sectarianism yg "cocok" dg pandangan sy.
Tentu saja sy menyadari bhw tdk smua umat Buddhis se7 dg pandangan sy. Utk itu sy menghormati pndngn org lain tsb & smoga yg lain jg menghormati pndgn sy ini (sy jg tdk mau berdebat ttg mana pandangan yg benar d sini)

 [at] indra:
Maaf,bkn sy tdk meyakini kekuatan Buddha yg lbh d atas manusia biasa,ttp sy menganggap ini adl diskusi ttg analisa thd sutta dg cara2 ilmiah spt yg dlakukan para ahli. D sini kt dharapkan meninggalkan sisi religius kt sejenak (mgkn tdk smuany krn ini adl forum religius) & menggunakan sisi keilmiahan kt. Jd d sini sy memandang (maaf) Buddha spt guru biasa yg wkt ny sama dg wkt manusia biasa dg kecepatan bicara spt rata2 kcptn bicara kt.
Misalny dr sisi religius seorg Buddhis meyakini bhw proses terjdny hujan krn hukum utu niyama yg kerjany hny dpahami oleh mrk yg tlah memiliki abhinna. Ttp dr segi keilmiahan seorg buddhis boleh meneliti,menganalisa bgmn terjadiny hujan dg metode ilmiah.
Mnrt sy bknkah sutta2 penting spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dsb diakui oleh smua aliran & tdk bnyk berbeda versi antara satu dg lainny shg tdk dpertnykn/dperdebatkn lg? Justru sutta2 yg tdk ad dlm satu tradisi tp ad d tradisi lain menjd pokok perdebatan sengit. Thx
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Sunkmanitu Tanka Ob'waci

  • Sebelumnya: Karuna, Wolverine, gachapin
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 5.806
  • Reputasi: 239
  • Gender: Male
  • 会いたい。
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #42 on: 01 March 2010, 01:58:11 PM »
:hammer: pusing baca singkatan-singkatan, mungkin ada baiknya mengetik kata-kata secara penuh.
HANYA MENERIMA UCAPAN TERIMA KASIH DALAM BENTUK GRP
Fake friends are like shadows never around on your darkest days

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #43 on: 01 March 2010, 07:31:18 PM »
:hammer: pusing baca singkatan-singkatan, mungkin ada baiknya mengetik kata-kata secara penuh.

Sori, bro, ak pakai hp td siang abis kantor ak gak ada internet. Tahu sendiri kan kalau pakai hp ketik pjg2 kan susah......
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #44 on: 01 March 2010, 11:44:08 PM »

 [at] indra:
Maaf,bkn sy tdk meyakini kekuatan Buddha yg lbh d atas manusia biasa,ttp sy menganggap ini adl diskusi ttg analisa thd sutta dg cara2 ilmiah spt yg dlakukan para ahli. D sini kt dharapkan meninggalkan sisi religius kt sejenak (mgkn tdk smuany krn ini adl forum religius) & menggunakan sisi keilmiahan kt. Jd d sini sy memandang (maaf) Buddha spt guru biasa yg wkt ny sama dg wkt manusia biasa dg kecepatan bicara spt rata2 kcptn bicara kt.
Misalny dr sisi religius seorg Buddhis meyakini bhw proses terjdny hujan krn hukum utu niyama yg kerjany hny dpahami oleh mrk yg tlah memiliki abhinna. Ttp dr segi keilmiahan seorg buddhis boleh meneliti,menganalisa bgmn terjadiny hujan dg metode ilmiah.
Mnrt sy bknkah sutta2 penting spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dsb diakui oleh smua aliran & tdk bnyk berbeda versi antara satu dg lainny shg tdk dpertnykn/dperdebatkn lg? Justru sutta2 yg tdk ad dlm satu tradisi tp ad d tradisi lain menjd pokok perdebatan sengit. Thx

Ada hal-hal supranatural yg tidak bisa kita tinggalkan dalam membahas Buddhism,
menurut anda secara ilmiah apakah peristiwa Sang Buddha membabarkan Abhidhamma di Tavatimsa adalah tidak benar?
Sang Buddha adalah makhluk luar biasa, guru para dewa dan manusia, tentu tidak bisa disamakan dengan guru biasa.
selain itu, Ananda dikatakan selalu mendampingi Sang Buddha, bahkan secara ilmiah pun masih masuk akal bagi Sang Buddha untuk mengulangi semua yg pernah dikhotbahkan sebelum Ananda ditunjuk sebagai pelayan pribadi, sedangkan khotbah yang dibabarkan setelah Ananda menjadi pelayan pribadi tentu tidak perlu diulang.

Offline ryu

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 13.403
  • Reputasi: 429
  • Gender: Male
  • hampir mencapai penggelapan sempurna ;D
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #45 on: 02 March 2010, 07:21:18 AM »

 [at] indra:
Maaf,bkn sy tdk meyakini kekuatan Buddha yg lbh d atas manusia biasa,ttp sy menganggap ini adl diskusi ttg analisa thd sutta dg cara2 ilmiah spt yg dlakukan para ahli. D sini kt dharapkan meninggalkan sisi religius kt sejenak (mgkn tdk smuany krn ini adl forum religius) & menggunakan sisi keilmiahan kt. Jd d sini sy memandang (maaf) Buddha spt guru biasa yg wkt ny sama dg wkt manusia biasa dg kecepatan bicara spt rata2 kcptn bicara kt.
Misalny dr sisi religius seorg Buddhis meyakini bhw proses terjdny hujan krn hukum utu niyama yg kerjany hny dpahami oleh mrk yg tlah memiliki abhinna. Ttp dr segi keilmiahan seorg buddhis boleh meneliti,menganalisa bgmn terjadiny hujan dg metode ilmiah.
Mnrt sy bknkah sutta2 penting spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dsb diakui oleh smua aliran & tdk bnyk berbeda versi antara satu dg lainny shg tdk dpertnykn/dperdebatkn lg? Justru sutta2 yg tdk ad dlm satu tradisi tp ad d tradisi lain menjd pokok perdebatan sengit. Thx

Ada hal-hal supranatural yg tidak bisa kita tinggalkan dalam membahas Buddhism,
menurut anda secara ilmiah apakah peristiwa Sang Buddha membabarkan Abhidhamma di Tavatimsa adalah tidak benar?
Sang Buddha adalah makhluk luar biasa, guru para dewa dan manusia, tentu tidak bisa disamakan dengan guru biasa.
selain itu, Ananda dikatakan selalu mendampingi Sang Buddha, bahkan secara ilmiah pun masih masuk akal bagi Sang Buddha untuk mengulangi semua yg pernah dikhotbahkan sebelum Ananda ditunjuk sebagai pelayan pribadi, sedangkan khotbah yang dibabarkan setelah Ananda menjadi pelayan pribadi tentu tidak perlu diulang.
bukankah memang seperti dongeng ko ke tavatimsa itu, tidak bisa dibuktikan secara ilmiah.
Janganlah memperhatikan kesalahan dan hal-hal yang telah atau belum dikerjakan oleh diri sendiri. Tetapi, perhatikanlah apa yang telah dikerjakan dan apa yang belum dikerjakan oleh orang lain =))

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #46 on: 02 March 2010, 10:30:00 AM »

 [at] indra:
Maaf,bkn sy tdk meyakini kekuatan Buddha yg lbh d atas manusia biasa,ttp sy menganggap ini adl diskusi ttg analisa thd sutta dg cara2 ilmiah spt yg dlakukan para ahli. D sini kt dharapkan meninggalkan sisi religius kt sejenak (mgkn tdk smuany krn ini adl forum religius) & menggunakan sisi keilmiahan kt. Jd d sini sy memandang (maaf) Buddha spt guru biasa yg wkt ny sama dg wkt manusia biasa dg kecepatan bicara spt rata2 kcptn bicara kt.
Misalny dr sisi religius seorg Buddhis meyakini bhw proses terjdny hujan krn hukum utu niyama yg kerjany hny dpahami oleh mrk yg tlah memiliki abhinna. Ttp dr segi keilmiahan seorg buddhis boleh meneliti,menganalisa bgmn terjadiny hujan dg metode ilmiah.
Mnrt sy bknkah sutta2 penting spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dsb diakui oleh smua aliran & tdk bnyk berbeda versi antara satu dg lainny shg tdk dpertnykn/dperdebatkn lg? Justru sutta2 yg tdk ad dlm satu tradisi tp ad d tradisi lain menjd pokok perdebatan sengit. Thx

Ada hal-hal supranatural yg tidak bisa kita tinggalkan dalam membahas Buddhism,
menurut anda secara ilmiah apakah peristiwa Sang Buddha membabarkan Abhidhamma di Tavatimsa adalah tidak benar?
Sang Buddha adalah makhluk luar biasa, guru para dewa dan manusia, tentu tidak bisa disamakan dengan guru biasa.
selain itu, Ananda dikatakan selalu mendampingi Sang Buddha, bahkan secara ilmiah pun masih masuk akal bagi Sang Buddha untuk mengulangi semua yg pernah dikhotbahkan sebelum Ananda ditunjuk sebagai pelayan pribadi, sedangkan khotbah yang dibabarkan setelah Ananda menjadi pelayan pribadi tentu tidak perlu diulang.
bukankah memang seperti dongeng ko ke tavatimsa itu, tidak bisa dibuktikan secara ilmiah.

memang bagi kita seperti dongeng, tapi pada saat itu, saksinya banyak

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #47 on: 02 March 2010, 01:12:00 PM »
 [at] indra:
Sy menyadari bhw hal2 supranatural tdk bs dhindarkan jk berdiskusi mslh agama krn keyakinan thd agama jg meliputi keyakinan thd hal2 demikian.

Sy jg meyakini Buddha dg segala atribut supranaturalny,tetapi jika pun smua atribut kemampuan batin tsb ternyata hny dbuat2/rekaan,sy tetap meyakini Buddha krn dr berbagai buku & sutta yg pernah sy baca Buddha adl sosok yg lain dr yg lain krn kebijaksanaan & tindak tandukny yg sempurna tanpa catat. Jd,walaupun agama tetangga mengatakan bhw tokoh suci mrk bs menghidupkan org mati,tetapi Buddha tdk bs berbuat demikian (oleh sebab itu kalah hebat dlm hal kekuatan gaib),keyakinan sy thd Buddha tdk akan goyah krn inti keyakinan sy bkn pd atribut luar biasa Buddha tetapi pd kesempurnaan Beliau dlm sila,samadhi,& panna.

Ok,let's back to the topic. Jk menurut anda,msh ilmiah Buddha bs mengulang smua kotbah seb Ananda menjd Pembantu Tetap,mgkn ad benarny. Tetapi anda blm menjwb pertanyaan sy pd kalimat terakhir postingan sy sebny. Thx
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Nevada

  • Sebelumnya: Upasaka
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 6.445
  • Reputasi: 234
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #48 on: 02 March 2010, 01:22:06 PM »
...

Sy jg meyakini Buddha dg segala atribut supranaturalny,tetapi jika pun smua atribut kemampuan batin tsb ternyata hny dbuat2/rekaan,sy tetap meyakini Buddha krn dr berbagai buku & sutta yg pernah sy baca Buddha adl sosok yg lain dr yg lain krn kebijaksanaan & tindak tandukny yg sempurna tanpa catat. Jd,walaupun agama tetangga mengatakan bhw tokoh suci mrk bs menghidupkan org mati,tetapi Buddha tdk bs berbuat demikian (oleh sebab itu kalah hebat dlm hal kekuatan gaib),keyakinan sy thd Buddha tdk akan goyah krn inti keyakinan sy bkn pd atribut luar biasa Buddha tetapi pd kesempurnaan Beliau dlm sila,samadhi,& panna.

...

Sekadar info, Sang Buddha sebenarnya bisa menghidupkan kembali orang yang sudah mati...

Di Sanjiva Jataka, Bodhisatta pernah mengajarkan metode untuk menghidupkan kembali makhluk yang sudah mati kepada muridnya yang bernama Sanjiva. Namun Sanjiva yang ceroboh malah menggunakannya untuk menghidupkan harimau yang sudah mati, sehingga Sanjiva malah diterkam oleh harimau itu.

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #49 on: 02 March 2010, 01:24:42 PM »

 [at] indra:
Maaf,bkn sy tdk meyakini kekuatan Buddha yg lbh d atas manusia biasa,ttp sy menganggap ini adl diskusi ttg analisa thd sutta dg cara2 ilmiah spt yg dlakukan para ahli. D sini kt dharapkan meninggalkan sisi religius kt sejenak (mgkn tdk smuany krn ini adl forum religius) & menggunakan sisi keilmiahan kt. Jd d sini sy memandang (maaf) Buddha spt guru biasa yg wkt ny sama dg wkt manusia biasa dg kecepatan bicara spt rata2 kcptn bicara kt.
Misalny dr sisi religius seorg Buddhis meyakini bhw proses terjdny hujan krn hukum utu niyama yg kerjany hny dpahami oleh mrk yg tlah memiliki abhinna. Ttp dr segi keilmiahan seorg buddhis boleh meneliti,menganalisa bgmn terjadiny hujan dg metode ilmiah.
Mnrt sy bknkah sutta2 penting spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dsb diakui oleh smua aliran & tdk bnyk berbeda versi antara satu dg lainny shg tdk dpertnykn/dperdebatkn lg? Justru sutta2 yg tdk ad dlm satu tradisi tp ad d tradisi lain menjd pokok perdebatan sengit. Thx
post terakhir anda sebelum yg terakhir adalah yg saya quote di atas, saya tidak melihat ada pertanyaan yg ditujukan kepada saya, mungkin karena saya tidak memahami bahasa sms.
malah anda yg belum menjawab saya mengenai episode Sang Buddha di Tavatimsa
« Last Edit: 02 March 2010, 01:26:40 PM by Indra »

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #50 on: 02 March 2010, 07:28:21 PM »

 [at] indra:
Maaf,bkn sy tdk meyakini kekuatan Buddha yg lbh d atas manusia biasa,ttp sy menganggap ini adl diskusi ttg analisa thd sutta dg cara2 ilmiah spt yg dlakukan para ahli. D sini kt dharapkan meninggalkan sisi religius kt sejenak (mgkn tdk smuany krn ini adl forum religius) & menggunakan sisi keilmiahan kt. Jd d sini sy memandang (maaf) Buddha spt guru biasa yg wkt ny sama dg wkt manusia biasa dg kecepatan bicara spt rata2 kcptn bicara kt.
Misalny dr sisi religius seorg Buddhis meyakini bhw proses terjdny hujan krn hukum utu niyama yg kerjany hny dpahami oleh mrk yg tlah memiliki abhinna. Ttp dr segi keilmiahan seorg buddhis boleh meneliti,menganalisa bgmn terjadiny hujan dg metode ilmiah.
Mnrt sy bknkah sutta2 penting spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dsb diakui oleh smua aliran & tdk bnyk berbeda versi antara satu dg lainny shg tdk dpertnykn/dperdebatkn lg? Justru sutta2 yg tdk ad dlm satu tradisi tp ad d tradisi lain menjd pokok perdebatan sengit. Thx
post terakhir anda sebelum yg terakhir adalah yg saya quote di atas, saya tidak melihat ada pertanyaan yg ditujukan kepada saya, mungkin karena saya tidak memahami bahasa sms.
malah anda yg belum menjawab saya mengenai episode Sang Buddha di Tavatimsa

Yg di-bold itu lohhh......
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #51 on: 02 March 2010, 07:37:45 PM »

 [at] indra:
Maaf,bkn sy tdk meyakini kekuatan Buddha yg lbh d atas manusia biasa,ttp sy menganggap ini adl diskusi ttg analisa thd sutta dg cara2 ilmiah spt yg dlakukan para ahli. D sini kt dharapkan meninggalkan sisi religius kt sejenak (mgkn tdk smuany krn ini adl forum religius) & menggunakan sisi keilmiahan kt. Jd d sini sy memandang (maaf) Buddha spt guru biasa yg wkt ny sama dg wkt manusia biasa dg kecepatan bicara spt rata2 kcptn bicara kt.
Misalny dr sisi religius seorg Buddhis meyakini bhw proses terjdny hujan krn hukum utu niyama yg kerjany hny dpahami oleh mrk yg tlah memiliki abhinna. Ttp dr segi keilmiahan seorg buddhis boleh meneliti,menganalisa bgmn terjadiny hujan dg metode ilmiah.
Mnrt sy bknkah sutta2 penting spt Dhammacakkapavattana sutta dsb diakui oleh smua aliran & tdk bnyk berbeda versi antara satu dg lainny shg tdk dpertnykn/dperdebatkn lg? Justru sutta2 yg tdk ad dlm satu tradisi tp ad d tradisi lain menjd pokok perdebatan sengit. Thx
post terakhir anda sebelum yg terakhir adalah yg saya quote di atas, saya tidak melihat ada pertanyaan yg ditujukan kepada saya, mungkin karena saya tidak memahami bahasa sms.
malah anda yg belum menjawab saya mengenai episode Sang Buddha di Tavatimsa

Yg di-bold itu lohhh......

saya harus mengakui bahwa saya menganut ajaran Theravada dan saya tidak memahami dan tidak memiliki kapasitas untuk mengomentari ajaran lainnya, apalagi memperdebatkan.

dan bagaimana dengan jawaban anda?

Offline The Ronald

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 2.231
  • Reputasi: 89
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #52 on: 02 March 2010, 07:44:29 PM »
cukup menarik lihat yg di bold..
tp ada pula sutta-sutta yg menjadi perdebatan, dan melibatkan ananda di dalamnya...
...

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #53 on: 02 March 2010, 07:58:14 PM »
Ada hal-hal supranatural yg tidak bisa kita tinggalkan dalam membahas Buddhism,
menurut anda secara ilmiah apakah peristiwa Sang Buddha membabarkan Abhidhamma di Tavatimsa adalah tidak benar?
Sang Buddha adalah makhluk luar biasa, guru para dewa dan manusia, tentu tidak bisa disamakan dengan guru biasa.
selain itu, Ananda dikatakan selalu mendampingi Sang Buddha, bahkan secara ilmiah pun masih masuk akal bagi Sang Buddha untuk mengulangi semua yg pernah dikhotbahkan sebelum Ananda ditunjuk sebagai pelayan pribadi, sedangkan khotbah yang dibabarkan setelah Ananda menjadi pelayan pribadi tentu tidak perlu diulang.

Secara ilmiah memang tidak masuk akal bahwa seseorang bisa mengajar para dewa di alam surga, apalagi secara ilmiah surga tidak bisa dibuktikan keberadaannya.

Namun ada teori yang menarik bahwa makhluk surgawi yang digambarkan berbagai agama sebenarnya makhluk asing (alien) dari planet, tata surya, galaksi, atau bahkan alam semesta lain dan surga tak lain adalah tempat kediaman alien tersebut (yaitu planet, tata surya, galaksi, atau alam semesta lain tersebut). Walaupun ini sekedar teori yang tidak bisa dibuktikan dan mungkin tidak ilmiah, namun bisa menjadi pendekatan yang ilmiah bahwa Buddha pergi ke planet, tata surya, galaksi, atau alam semesta lain untuk mengajar Abhidhamma kepada para makhluk di tempat tersebut.
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Indra

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 14.819
  • Reputasi: 451
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #54 on: 02 March 2010, 08:02:23 PM »
Ada hal-hal supranatural yg tidak bisa kita tinggalkan dalam membahas Buddhism,
menurut anda secara ilmiah apakah peristiwa Sang Buddha membabarkan Abhidhamma di Tavatimsa adalah tidak benar?
Sang Buddha adalah makhluk luar biasa, guru para dewa dan manusia, tentu tidak bisa disamakan dengan guru biasa.
selain itu, Ananda dikatakan selalu mendampingi Sang Buddha, bahkan secara ilmiah pun masih masuk akal bagi Sang Buddha untuk mengulangi semua yg pernah dikhotbahkan sebelum Ananda ditunjuk sebagai pelayan pribadi, sedangkan khotbah yang dibabarkan setelah Ananda menjadi pelayan pribadi tentu tidak perlu diulang.

Secara ilmiah memang tidak masuk akal bahwa seseorang bisa mengajar para dewa di alam surga, apalagi secara ilmiah surga tidak bisa dibuktikan keberadaannya.

Namun ada teori yang menarik bahwa makhluk surgawi yang digambarkan berbagai agama sebenarnya makhluk asing (alien) dari planet, tata surya, galaksi, atau bahkan alam semesta lain dan surga tak lain adalah tempat kediaman alien tersebut (yaitu planet, tata surya, galaksi, atau alam semesta lain tersebut). Walaupun ini sekedar teori yang tidak bisa dibuktikan dan mungkin tidak ilmiah, namun bisa menjadi pendekatan yang ilmiah bahwa Buddha pergi ke planet, tata surya, galaksi, atau alam semesta lain untuk mengajar Abhidhamma kepada para makhluk di tempat tersebut.

yah mungkin sekedar keyakinan membuta saya saja yg mempercayai episode ini, dan saya tidak suka menggunakan pendekatan ilmiah untuk kasus ini. Dikatakan bahwa pada saat Sang Buddha turun melalui tangga dari alam tavatimsa, para deva dan manusia dapat saling melihat satu sama lain. saya tidak pernah melihat bakteri, tapi saya percaya itu ada, karena para ilmuwan sudah melihatnya.

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #55 on: 02 March 2010, 08:27:32 PM »

saya harus mengakui bahwa saya menganut ajaran Theravada dan saya tidak memahami dan tidak memiliki kapasitas untuk mengomentari ajaran lainnya, apalagi memperdebatkan.

dan bagaimana dengan jawaban anda?

Jawaban yg bijaksana, anda seorang Theravadin sejati karena banyak orang yang mengaku Theravadin dan menghakimi bahwa sutra aliran aliran lain (terutama Mahayana) yang tidak ada dalam kanon Pali bukan berasal dari Buddha dan oleh sebab itu aliran tersebut "sesat"/menyimpang.

Menurut saya, kemungkinan memang benar bahwa sutra2 tertentu yang tidak ada dalam kanon Pali bukan berasal dari Buddha karena menurut penelitian, beberapa sutra muncul pada awal abad pertama masehi, jauh setelah wafatnya Sang Buddha, seperti Maha-prajna-paramita Sutra. Namun bisa juga seperti yang diklaim pihak Mahayana bahwa sutra tersebut berasal dari Buddha sendiri, dikotbahkan bukan di alam manusia (misalnya di alam naga seperti Sutra Avatamsaka, maaf kalau salah) karena di alam manusia tidak ada yang bisa menerima/memahami isinya. Kemudian ditulis dan disimpan di sana sampai ada manusia yang bisa mengerti isinya dan membawa pulang ke alam manusia.

Dari segi isi sendiri, isi sutra Mahayana (terutama yang membahas tentang prajna paramita atau sunyata/kekosongan) sesungguhnya pembahasan dalam sutra2 tersebut merupakan pengembangan ajaran Buddhis tentang panna atau anatta yang dikenal dalam ajaran Buddhis awal (Theravada). Jika pun benar bahwa sutra tersebut bukan berasal dari Buddha sendiri, namun dari segi isi masih mencerminkan ajaran Buddha yang benar (setidaknya mencerminkan bahwa orang yang membuatnya meski bukan Buddha namun memiliki kebijaksanaan seperti Buddha).

Ini cuma generalisasi, tidak sepenuhnya benar untuk semua sutra Mahayana. Untuk sutra2 secara individual harus dianalisa dan diteliti secara seksama sampai sedalam-dalamnya. Dan untuk penelitian seperti ini mungkin harus dilakukan secara netral (tidak dipengaruhi oleh aliran Buddha yang dianut). Ini sesungguhnya agak sulit karena setiap orang yang religius pasti memiliki pandangan religius yang mempengaruhi pendapat/pemikirannya. Thx.
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline ryu

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 13.403
  • Reputasi: 429
  • Gender: Male
  • hampir mencapai penggelapan sempurna ;D
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #56 on: 02 March 2010, 08:37:07 PM »
sudah sejauh mana ilmuwan2 meneliti sutta/sutra peninggalan2 ajaran Buddha.
Janganlah memperhatikan kesalahan dan hal-hal yang telah atau belum dikerjakan oleh diri sendiri. Tetapi, perhatikanlah apa yang telah dikerjakan dan apa yang belum dikerjakan oleh orang lain =))

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #57 on: 02 March 2010, 09:17:03 PM »
 [at] indra:
Benar,bro,namun dlm Buddhis diajarkan Ehipassiko. Walaupun penerapanny hrs melalui meditasi & realisasi pencapaianny,ttp setdkny melalui kajian thd sutta scr ilmiah bs mengembangkan semangat Ehipassiko tsb.

Lucuny yg kt yakini sbg kebenaran sains pun cuma "keyakinan" semata,spt yg anda katakan ttg bakteri d atas.

Sepertiny diskusi spt ini tdk ad gunanya krn tdk membawa pd kemajuan batin,malah sekedar menambah keingintahuan & spekulasi yg kt sebut "ilmiah".

 [at] ryu:
Sepertinya kajian ilmiah thd sutta/sutra msh minim. Beberapa yg pernah sy bc terutama kajian thd sutta Pali lebih bnyk drpd kajian thd sutra Sanskrit. Hal ini krn kanon Pali kt warisi scr lengkap & sudah bnyk terjemahanny dlm bhs inggris,tetapi kanon Sanskrit sudah bnyk yg hilang & terjemahanny dlm bhs inggris msh sedikit sekali.
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Sunkmanitu Tanka Ob'waci

  • Sebelumnya: Karuna, Wolverine, gachapin
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 5.806
  • Reputasi: 239
  • Gender: Male
  • 会いたい。
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #58 on: 02 March 2010, 09:25:28 PM »
sayangnya ehipassiko dalam arti sesungguhnya adalah penembusan jalan dan buah itu sendiri.
mau pakai cara ilmiah apapun akan mentok juga.

yang ada sekarang adalah pegangan kepada apa yang tertulis, sampai penembusan jalan dan buah yang sesungguhnya.
HANYA MENERIMA UCAPAN TERIMA KASIH DALAM BENTUK GRP
Fake friends are like shadows never around on your darkest days

Offline Riky_dave

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 4.229
  • Reputasi: -14
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #59 on: 02 March 2010, 09:27:42 PM »
sayangnya ehipassiko dalam arti sesungguhnya adalah penembusan jalan dan buah itu sendiri.
mau pakai cara ilmiah apapun akan mentok juga.

yang ada sekarang adalah pegangan kepada apa yang tertulis, sampai penembusan jalan dan buah yang sesungguhnya.

betull...betull...penembusan ini adalah "pemahaman" mendalam akan Sang Jalan,kemudian baru direalisasikan..dengan kita "memahami" REALITAS baru lah kita bisa menembus REALITAS tersebut..

Permasalahnya adalah ketika muncul beberapa argumen yang saling bertolak belakang,bagaimana kita tahu bahwa praktek kita tidak tersesat?

Seperti yang kita ketahui bersama,bahwa praktek meditasi setiap individu menghasilkan "momen2" yang berbeda bagi setiap individu itu juga,bagaimana kita mengetahui hal2 tersebut,sebagai jalur yang tepat?

Anumodana _/\_
Langkah pertama adalah langkah yg terakhir...

Offline Sunkmanitu Tanka Ob'waci

  • Sebelumnya: Karuna, Wolverine, gachapin
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 5.806
  • Reputasi: 239
  • Gender: Male
  • 会いたい。
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #60 on: 02 March 2010, 09:49:16 PM »
seperti kata indra, gak perlu lihat bakteri, tetapi percaya bakteri itu ada.

dulu saya pernah umpamakan, dari berbagai tukang obat, ada satu dokter yang reputasinya sangat baik, segala penjelasannya masuk akal. dia bertanggung jawab dan menjelaskan mulai dari permasalahan penyakit sampai pengobatannya sedetail mungkin. karena itu saya percaya sama dokter tersebut.

ini mungkin bisa disebut keyakinan (saddha). kalau keyakinan sejati tentu saja belum, karena saya belum tersembuhkan.
HANYA MENERIMA UCAPAN TERIMA KASIH DALAM BENTUK GRP
Fake friends are like shadows never around on your darkest days

Offline Riky_dave

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 4.229
  • Reputasi: -14
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #61 on: 02 March 2010, 09:53:28 PM »
seperti kata indra, gak perlu lihat bakteri, tetapi percaya bakteri itu ada.

dulu saya pernah umpamakan, dari berbagai tukang obat, ada satu dokter yang reputasinya sangat baik, segala penjelasannya masuk akal. dia bertanggung jawab dan menjelaskan mulai dari permasalahan penyakit sampai pengobatannya sedetail mungkin. karena itu saya percaya sama dokter tersebut.

ini mungkin bisa disebut keyakinan (saddha). kalau keyakinan sejati tentu saja belum, karena saya belum tersembuhkan.

Saya percaya pada "pencerahan" tersebut,tetapi saya ragu akan beberapa hal,dari segi meditasi diri saya sendiri..itu saja..tetapi seperti kata anda mengenai Saddha tersebut..Saya sangat setuju..

anumodana _/\_
Langkah pertama adalah langkah yg terakhir...

Offline bond

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.666
  • Reputasi: 189
  • Buddhang Saranam Gacchami...
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #62 on: 02 March 2010, 10:09:20 PM »
Pancabala seimbang is the best  :)
Natthi me saranam annam, Buddho me saranam varam, Etena saccavajjena, Sotthi te hotu sabbada

Offline GandalfTheElder

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 1.480
  • Reputasi: 75
  • Gender: Male
  • Exactly who we are is just enough (C. Underwood)
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #63 on: 03 March 2010, 07:52:38 AM »
Quote
Menurut Malalasekera dalam Dictionary of Pali Proper Names, mengutip pernyataan Samyuttanikāya Atthakatha, Vol. iii, 215, Bhikkhu Puraṇa masih seorang Sotapanna.

Samanera Peacemind, setahu saya dalam Dictionary of Pali disebutkan ada dua orang bernama Purana. yang mecapai Sotapanna adalah umat awam Purana, bukan bhikkhu Purana. Ini saya kutip:

Quote
1. Purāna
A monk who lived in Dakkhināgiri. It is said that when he visited Rājagaha after the holding of the First Council, he was asked to give his approval to the "findings" of the same. His answer was that he preferred to remember what he himself had heard and learnt from the Buddha. Vin.ii.189f.

2. Purāna
A chamberlain (thapati ? equerry) of Pasenadi. He was the brother of Isidatta and the father of Migasālā. In his later years he lived the life of a celibate and was reborn in Tusita as a sakadāgāmī. A.iii.348 ff.;v.138 ff. The SA (iii.215), however, says that Purāna was a sotāpanna. 

Dan setahu saya yang diminta berpratisipasi dalam Konsili adalah para Arahat. Maka dari itu misalnya Ananda yang masih Sotapanna, ditolak masuk Konsili oleh Mahakassapa. Tapi bhikkhu Purana sendiri diundang untuk berpartisipasi dalam Konsili dan diundang untuk menyetujui, menjadikannya kemungkinan besar adalah seorang Arahat.

Dalam Pali Dictionary, Gavampati Thera adalah seorang Arahat. Tetapi Mahasanghika Vinaya dan Mulasarvastivada Vinaya mencatat beliau menolak menghadiri Konsili yang diadakan Mahakasyapa.

Dari 8 poin yang dikemukakan Bhiksu Purana, maka saya paham bahwa di vihara-vihara Tiongkok, Korea, Jepang dan Tibet, para bhiksu memasak sendiri (cooking indoors dan keeping food) dan ini tidak bertentangan dengan Vinaya. Apalagi 8 poin Purana dijelaskan dalam detail di Dharmaguptaka Vinaya yang sekarang dipegang oleh para Sangha Tiongkok dan Korea. Apalagi waktu YA Baizhang menggalakkan kemandirian Sangha yaitu bercocok tanam di masa sulit Buddhisme waktu itu, saya rasa sesuai dengan poin keempat dari bhiksu Purana yaitu: taking food of one's own accord.

 _/\_
The Siddha Wanderer
Theravada is my root. This is the body of my practice.... It [Tibetan Buddhism]has given me my Compassion practice. Vajrayana is my thunder, my power. This is the heart of my practice..True wisdom is simple and full of lightness and humor. Zen is my no-self (??). This is the soul of my practice.

Offline Peacemind

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Reputasi: 74
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #64 on: 03 March 2010, 09:42:34 AM »
Quote
Menurut Malalasekera dalam Dictionary of Pali Proper Names, mengutip pernyataan Samyuttanikāya Atthakatha, Vol. iii, 215, Bhikkhu Puraṇa masih seorang Sotapanna.

Samanera Peacemind, setahu saya dalam Dictionary of Pali disebutkan ada dua orang bernama Purana. yang mecapai Sotapanna adalah umat awam Purana, bukan bhikkhu Purana. Ini saya kutip:

Quote
1. Purāna
A monk who lived in Dakkhināgiri. It is said that when he visited Rājagaha after the holding of the First Council, he was asked to give his approval to the "findings" of the same. His answer was that he preferred to remember what he himself had heard and learnt from the Buddha. Vin.ii.189f.

2. Purāna
A chamberlain (thapati ? equerry) of Pasenadi. He was the brother of Isidatta and the father of Migasālā. In his later years he lived the life of a celibate and was reborn in Tusita as a sakadāgāmī. A.iii.348 ff.;v.138 ff. The SA (iii.215), however, says that Purāna was a sotāpanna. 

Yap, sudah saya cek lagi dan memang anda yang benar. Great anumodana untuk koreksinya.

Quote
Dan setahu saya yang diminta berpratisipasi dalam Konsili adalah para Arahat. Maka dari itu misalnya Ananda yang masih Sotapanna, ditolak masuk Konsili oleh Mahakassapa. Tapi bhikkhu Purana sendiri diundang untuk berpartisipasi dalam Konsili dan diundang untuk menyetujui, menjadikannya kemungkinan besar adalah seorang Arahat.

Yap benar, memang para bhikkhu yang diseleksi oleh Bhikkhu Mahākassapa untuk berpartisapasi ke Konsili adalh para arahat yang memiliki tevijja (tiga jenis pengetahuan tinggi) dan dilengkapi oleh Patisambhida. Namun Samantapāsādika menerangkan bahwa pada awalnya bhikkhu Mahākassapa hanya memilih 499 arahat demikian karena ingin memberikan kesempatan kepada para arahat lain untuk memilih bhikkhu Ānanda juga.

Sejauh tradisi Theravāda memandang, tidak ada indikasi bahwa bhikkhu Purāna diundang untuk berpartisipasi dalam Konsili karena ia datang terlambat, namun memang beliau diminta Bhikkhu Mahākassapa untuk menyetujui keputusan2 Konsili. Awal2nya saya juga terbiasa berpikir bahwa bhikkhu Purāna pasti seorang arahat, namun setelah saya membaca Dictionary of Pāli Proper Names, kemudian saya juga heran mengapa beliau masih seorang sotapanna. Ternyata catatan kaki yang saya rujuk salah sehingga salah alamat!  I guess now I agree with you that he was supposed to be an arahant. (Lol).

Mettacittena.

Offline bond

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.666
  • Reputasi: 189
  • Buddhang Saranam Gacchami...
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #65 on: 03 March 2010, 11:17:29 AM »
Ic..ic....menarik sekali.  _/\_
Natthi me saranam annam, Buddho me saranam varam, Etena saccavajjena, Sotthi te hotu sabbada

Offline Mr. Wei

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.074
  • Reputasi: 99
  • Gender: Male
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #66 on: 08 August 2014, 11:23:48 PM »
Semoga gak melanggar aturan karena bumping thread yg udah bertahun-tahun.

Semoga diskusi seperti yang terdapat dalam thread ini bisa dilanjutkan. Bermanfaat sekali _/\_

Offline morpheus

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 2.750
  • Reputasi: 110
  • Ragu pangkal cerah!
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #67 on: 09 August 2014, 03:23:03 AM »
Semoga gak melanggar aturan karena bumping thread yg udah bertahun-tahun.

Semoga diskusi seperti yang terdapat dalam thread ini bisa dilanjutkan. Bermanfaat sekali _/\_
kalau mau dilanjutkan, mungkin bisa dihangatkan dengan pertanyaan?
* I'm trying to free your mind, Neo. But I can only show you the door. You're the one that has to walk through it
* Neo, sooner or later you're going to realize just as I did that there's a difference between knowing the path and walking the path

Offline seniya

  • Global Moderator
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 3.469
  • Reputasi: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Om muni muni mahamuni sakyamuni svaha
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #68 on: 09 August 2014, 09:53:40 AM »
Wah, tak terasa sudah 4 tahun thread ini, masih mau dilanjutkan?
"Holmes once said not to allow your judgement to be biased by personal qualities, and emotional qualities are antagonistic to clear reasoning."
~ Shinichi Kudo a.k.a Conan Edogawa

Offline Shasika

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 2.152
  • Reputasi: 101
  • Gender: Female
  • Semoga semua mahluk berbahagia
Re: Sutta dongeng???
« Reply #69 on: 09 August 2014, 10:49:07 AM »
Wah, tak terasa sudah 4 tahun thread ini, masih mau dilanjutkan?
Ga seru klo ga ada sam peacemind, ayo donk bro shinichi ajak sam peacemind utk gabung lagi.

I'm an ordinary human only

 

anything