Differences Between Early Buddhism and Theravada: an Essay By Bhante Sujato 

🧡 If you find benefit in my videos, consider supporting the channel by joining us on Patreon and get fun extras like exclusive videos, ad-free audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂 📙 You can find my new book here: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook

Just a simple Dhamma practitioner finding wisdom in all schools of Buddhism, Taoism, Indigenous, etc.. For Buddhism I rely on the teachings of the Buddha (Suttas) and Buddhadasa Bhikkhu also know as the second Buddha. 🙏🏼

I truly appreciate all of the research and hard work you do, as well as your capacity as an orator, To consider you accomplish this on your own is a feat in it of itself, thank you! Sadhu sadhu

Hey Doug, awesome talk!

Glad you are posting new videos again. Thanks.

Hey, Doug! This was super ineresting! I've definitely bookmarked the essay to read later. Thanks so much for sharing this! Hope you and your wife are doing well and that things with the house are going as smoothly as possible.

A important and illuminating video, Doug. Thank you !

In reality, I don't see that the Thai forest tradition (Theravada) differs from early Buddhism as you described. Not that I have seen. I never saw anyone that thinks the Abhidhamma was around in the Buddha's time. And I think more than scholars, we need people that actually accomplish supramundane attainments that put forth what they know so there can be some correlation between experiences and the texts to ferret out the plain truths of the path. I strongly dislike the obfuscation that surrounds the 4 stages of enlightenment because I think it damages Buddhism as the 'scientific' path it was intended to be, for the most part. I have heard that it is an eastern superstition that making such things clear prevents their attainment due to expectation, but I don't agree with that. People forget easily enough, and at the highest stages, there is no mind anyway. Lack of clarity/definition relegates Buddhism to the nature of most western religions.

Awesome Content as usual, Doug.

I am a buddhist. The Jhana case is taught to me in this way. Jhana though extremely important, is a very long and arduous task. Some spend decades of their lives and achieved seemingly nothing special. And also, Jhana never fades away. Even after, buddhism and all buddha's teachings are gone, Jhana will remain. Concentration practices exist in almost any religions. But vipassana or applying buddha's teachings on your own body with your own mind's eye is special. It can only exist during the Buddha's "Sarsanar". So famous monks push their students to only focus a little on Jhana and make the most of Vipassana because life is too short. Most people who are into religion are at extremely old ages. Their body is not suitable for extremely long periods of concentration anymore.

So interesting. I’m an archaeologist and want to study the early remains of Buddhist communities

I love Early Buddhism due to its pragmatism and down-to-earth approach. This video (and Bhante Sujato's essay) corroborate my love... 😁😉 😊🙏

Bhikkhu Analayo is great on that topic too.

Very helpful, thanks.

Many thanks for this presentation. 🙂🙏

A very clear and balanced presentation on the differences,tq Dr Doug, Richard D CRUZ,Malaysia.

Do agree that an early buddhism & theravada one are not identical. Since theravada was born 500 years(?) after the buddha had gone to pari-nibbana. there is only so much tradition we can enjoy in terms of the early buddhism. Do believe that buddhism in this modern-day has changed and been distorted.

Excellent, thank you for your talk

It's interesting to see how things and paths only diverse with time. Maybe we all pick up from the points that intrigue us.

I've gone through a number of different Buddhist traditions in the last few decades. Theravada might not be identical to the earliest Buddhist practice. However I find it to be the least religious version that is still practiced. This might sound strange, aren't they all religious? Well some schools place more emphasis on veneration of aspects of the Buddha as salvation in themselves. Really not being much different from Catholicism in the way that they pray before statues for intercession on their behalf. All Buddhism has a fair amount of mythological tales. But Mahayana branch schools seem to be more invested in fantastical tales of supernatural beings, not as parable or metaphor, but as the thing in itself. Theravada is bit more philosophical though it has it's fair share of prayerfulness and myth.

Very high quality content here. It's a matter of time before this channel explodes and gets 100ks views. Don't be hardhearted by the limited views please. RU-vid recommended this to me so you're getting there.

Thanks you. 🙏

Thank u for this

IMO, we could avoid a lot of confusion if we agreed to define "enlightenment" as "attaining a radiant mind": it makes sense as a metaphor and explains why thinking of Buddha as "the enlightened one" (as discussed in another video) makes sense because of the radiant mind he attained through the jhanas. Nibbana would be something different, although related ; as someone having achieved Nibbana, the Buddha's proper title is "Tathāgata" (gone for good, gone definitely), as Doug explained in the previous video: two titles for two different attainments

Haven't yet listened to this one but wanted to thank you for your recommendation of Alex Wynne's work in one of your jhana vids. His lectures led me to Grzegorz Polak's Reexamining Jhana. Thanks for your continued work in sharing these discussions. Nice vids!

Thank you, that was really informative and concise and well written too. One of your best videos yet, maybe. I find I like best your videos that somehow do really relate to the practice and inform it. Do you have a video on the early ideas about the progress of insight? Versions of the Theravada map exist, but they can be rather confusing and are hard to apply to a secular practice. It's something I have trouble navigating and identifying my own progress with on "the path". Hope you're well. It was nice to see you in your old study. And lovely too seeing the seated wooden buddha that I so adored over the past years when watching your videos. So much so that I got a similar one. Sorry you had to let go of that. Metta.

Enjoyable and interesting video! Thanks :-)

Thank you for this video. Until now I actually thought that Theravada is almost the same as Early Buddhism. I never knew that it was difficult for women to restore their tradition in Theravada. It makes me a bit sad.

My meditation teacher follows the Theravada tradition. He does ackowledge the jhanas, but tells us that the focus is on satipatthana, mindful observation of the body, sensation, feeling, liking/disliking, thoughts, dhammas (sets of reality). Just adding my personal experience with the theravada tradition about the jhana, if it may be useful.

Hey Doug. Hope everything is going well with you. Any update on your situation with your house? I plan on picking up your book Buddhist Wisdom and I'm really excited to read it. Take care my friend and looking forward to the next video.

Hi Doug, Excellent video as always!! It is getting spicy. I just love what Bhante Sujato is doing. That isn't an easy job at all even though I disagree on quite a number of them. I am from Burma, the stronghold of Abhidhamma, and was a monk from Mahasi. The town where I live is the birthplace of Both Pha auk and Mahasi. After I found out Dry insight and Samadi are big controversies on the internet, I tried to discuss this topic. But I have never really seen them fighting over whether dry insight is right or not. They don't seem to have many opinions at all on this matter. Abbot just told me every monastery has its own method when you are here, practice my methods. here Monks are really quite fluid. They move between monasteries whenever they felt like it.

Thanks a lot, Doug for explaining some of the differences between EBT and Theravada based on Bhikkhu Sujato's recent text. One key distinction, dry vs. jhana-based attainments, seems to be a perennial one, at least going back to the beginning of the Burmese Vipassana schools. I wonder why there is not more attention given to the statements by arahants who described their practice which seems to have been different in each case. So there is no one universal method perhaps, as Bhikkhu Sujato suggests.

Hi Doug, Some of my thoughts on differences between Early Buddhism (what I call as Moolyana) and Theravada... 1. There was a considerable constant change in the political environment of Magadh since the time of Shakyamuni Buddha to the time of Emperor Asoka. This entire period of time was a time where the society of Magadh seems to have many voices, many opinions as the empire of Magadh constantly grew generation over generation and consolidated its position as pan India entity. When such a thing happens for a society, it further generally gains more space to express opinions and different views. In fact, this is the period when first three (some may consider four) councils of Buddhism and first council of Jainism took place. And in all of such councils, we can see people having different views and opinions, and at most times a split within a tradition happening. 2. Abhidamma has a lot of similarity in the "dryness" you mentioned to that of Emperor Asoka's Dhamma. In fact, the time of Asoka seems to be the one when Abhidamma was codified and actually became very popular. 3. About Acharya Buddhagosa saying Pali being a natural language. Well, I can somewhat relate to him.. Pali and Prakrit grew as one can say, dialect of Sanskrit. If you try teaching Sanskrit to a child as his mother tongue, he will not actually speak Sanskrit at first. Rather he would speak a language which is cruder form of Sanskrit. It is in this way, Pali and Prakrit became a language for all common people who didn't actually spent considerable time studying Sanskrit or were seriously into academics. It took considerable time and academic dedication to be adept in Sanskrit. In this sense, Pali can be said a natural language compared to Sanskrit, which has always been language for scholars and people well-versed in academics in India. Hence, Buddhagosa himself being a scholar would have found this natural aspect of Pali. 4. Of course, I think people should not be restricted by gender, whatever that gender be, to be part of Sangha... And people should come up with better reasons if they still have any opposition to this and should not just go by belief. One must understand that the story of Buddhism is also one of a generational change, as I mentioned above. 5. Being an Indian and having born and raised in this culture, I feel that Indian way of thinking is more about the truth than the fact. It's more about the practice than the philosophy. And we may never know with 100% accuracy about all that Buddha taught in terms of fact. And even if one worries and finds all of this and not actual and sincere practice of this, I feel that it's of no use. This doesn't mean one should stop looking for things but there is a limitation to historical reconstructions. I feel one can actually find what Buddha taught by sincere practice and an enquiry within. More than facts, there should be a focus on the truth. Different generations over time have had different expressions to refer to this practice and enquiry. Therefore we find tons of traditions in Buddhism. Hence, I don't like this view by traditional Theravada followers that "oh we know the real shit" or even this view by the Mahayana folks that "oh our shit is the most evolved thing." It's just that people express stuff according to their time, generation, environment and resources.

Hi Doug.. when you mentioned "academy" in the final stages of this video, can I please ask what institution you were referring to? Many thanks and keep up the great work

You forgot burma where earliest surviving Pali texts in the world were found.? The oldest known Pali texts. Pyu Burmese Golden Pali texts: A description of some Pali texts found inscribed on gold in an old Burmese stupa which demonstrate the care with which the Pali tradition has been preserved even during the early medieval period in Burma( by Janice Stargardt

9:00 reminds me of a language deprivation experiment with children I heard about, in the West, where they were reported to speak Hebrew!

It's their rights for those theravadins to claim as the most authentic school of Buddhism, but it's also their burden to prove such grandiose claim. Of course not by relying on mythical accounts, but scientific methods instead as done by Bhikkhu Sujato. Thank you for this video! 👍😊

🙏

What are the sources of studying Early Buddhism ?

Early Buddhism must be recovered indeed, because most of Theravadas are said that they are the only truth Buddhism and the other are fake and broken. I am also Theravada Buddhist but I don't like that kind of Buddhism especially in my country Burma, Myanmar, it is extremely conservative and fascist to other kind of Buddhism and also other religions.

If early Buddhism is the original authentic teachings of Gautama, then why did other movements arise? Why did they need anything aside from what Buddha himself taught??

Please do a video on the 18 schools of Buddhism, sir.

At 12:40, I didn't realize that the Eight-fold path was a series of stages with right samadhi as the final step. If that was the case then we are all doing it wrong!? I abhor giving significance to 'right-concentration' at the expense of the others because it is all too common for monastics to over-emphasize it. After all, who are best at practicing samadhi than the people who have all the time and convenience to do so in contrast to lay practitioners who have to navigate the nuisances of everyday life with families, work, paying bills and so on and therefore have no time to devote as much attention to it. Instead I have always pictured the 8-fold as a series of strands that curls and twirls around each other, hence the "fold", supporting and reinforcing each other to make a strong rope. An all-around practice.

I believe "radiance" is common throughout Buddhism and has a link to the fact that all experience is projected from mind. Mind is said to shine out. This is also sometimes referred to as illumination or the luminous aspect of mind despite the fact that it is fundamentally empty. This aspect becomes apparent in non-objective experience of bare dharmakaya. Aren't words fun!

After watching this I was wondering why the two types of Buddhism (Early and Theravada) could not simply be two 'branches' of Buddhism? I haven't studied Early Buddhism very much, but when you present distinctions it sounds like these are the kinds of distinctions that come up when comparing schools within a tradition. It reminds me of discussions about Digambara and Svetambara Jainism and which one was earlier. Is there a view that sees Early Buddhism as necessarily chronologically prior to Theravada? and if so what is that based on. Thanks, as always, for your videos.

The biggest hurdle for the nun is the Bhikkhuni Vinaya. It is so restrictive by modern standers that it is almost impossible for them to keep.

As the mind switches off, so to speak, at the deeper jhanas, what insights can be attained there? As was introduced to it, the deep jhanas are restful states rather than a platform for exploration of the mind/insights.

For me, The Theravada school of Sri Lanka and Thailand being the most earliest representation of early Buddhism......Mahayana and Vajrayana & Dzogchen are later not necessarily wrong but come later time wise.

I'm curious about the relationship between zen (chan/dhyana/jhana) Buddhism and early buddhism. It seems to me that if you were to remove or de-emphasize a lot of the stuff that seems to be later additions to the canon (like the four noble truths and the eightfold path) you end up with something very much like zen, where virtue, compassion, meditation, and jhana attainment is the bulk of the way.

So Theravada will eventually lose the EARLY Buddhism status! 🙂🙂🙂 It's interesting to think of Early Buddhism or Buddhism as it was, devoid of Even Theravada or Pali Buddhism. If more research happens that can lead to an eye-opening and convincing outcome, then it will be wonderful.

Another point against the need for attaining the 4th jhana as a prerequisite to enlightenment is zen Buddhism. The monkey wrench a koan throws into one's discursive stream of thoughts presumably doesn't send one into the 4th jhana though does, if you believe reports, cause enlightenment.

When asked if other ascetics can attain nibbana, Buddha said any practice that contains the noble 8 fold path can lead to nibbana. So dry insight needs to be re evaluated. Perhaps the misconception of dry insight overlook past lives practice of the noble 8 fold path. Cheers.

A little context on dry insight: The dry insight tradition, which comes from Burma, is a lay specific movement. For a long time, meditation was simply not taught to the laity in Burma, and the government wanted to change that. It asked the monks to develop a system for lay people to learn. The monks reasoned that the laity simply don't have the time or proper environment to develop samatha fully to jhana. So, they developed a system that was more accessible, using the belief that momentary concentration, the state that path insights (the mind moments that produce enlightenment stages) require, are on about the same level as access concentration, which is the state that is a prerequisite to jhana but much easier to achieve. So, there's good reason for the dry insight tradition, but it's entirely a lay movement. It took off in a weird direction thanks mostly to the particular cultural quarks of southeast Asia and Goenka's native India, where they now try to argue that the Buddha only taught dry insight, jhanas are addictive and dangerous, and only they have the Buddha's original teaching. They even tried to form a translation society to basically edit the Pali Canon to say what they want it to say. It's a weird movement that started with the best of intentions. But, keep in mind it's a lay movement and just one faction at that.

At the beginning of the each sutta in early Pali, Who said" Thus have I heard"? If you know the answer, that why, it is called Theravada Buddhism.

Prof. Keep in deeply mind that “Those ignorant people who go about criticizing the Noble Dhamma, MAGGA, pass on to the terrible Roruva hell and experiencing suffering for a long time” (Bodhi, 2000, p. 188: A translation of Samyutta Nikaya, Wisdom Publication, Boston). With a mercy, you all are wisely reminded for the sake of yourselves! (Venerable Khamdai, Expert on Visakha Meditation: 6November2567)

what was it the old monk said....

There was only one Buddha; there is only one Buddhism. All the rivers and streams of Jambudvipa flow into the great ocean. One single Buddha vehicle; Upaya splits into three, five and eight. The Dharma seed planted by the Enlightened one grows and evolves, for it is truly alive.

Hahahahah.. 🌹🌹🌹 Loving kindness to all,, 🙏❤️

I wonder how much original Buddhism has in common with the teachings found in the upanishads.

How much does early Buddhism differ from Mahayana and Vajrayana?

The Buddha went to heaven to teach Abhidhamma to his mother. Sariputta Thero listened to it from the Buddha to teach it to humans. Abhidhamma is the fundamental science of almost everything. It is a teaching about Matter, Mental Factors, Mind, and Nibbana. Scientists didn't discover all the elements in the universe yet. Abhidhamma is the only oldest teaching about the existence of the smallest elements. We can't find those teachings from Buddhist Suttas. According to Abhidhamma, there are 24 material forms (Rupa) derived from 4 main elements. Mental factors are immaterial forms (Cetasika) that fundamentally exist in the universe. Fortunately, I could discover the existence of those elements. So, I'm sure that the Buddha could discover those elements.

It seems to me that the Buddha actually actively tried to prevent "Buddhism" in developing - "Buddshism" as a doctrine that follows (blindly) the Buddhas words. On several occations he encouraged people to NOT simply believe what he said, but to realise the truth for yourself. If people were indeed following the work of the buddha, there would not be any discusion as to what he meant - all discussion would be focussed on finding the truth - a discussion in which the buddhas words should be simply seen as one view among many. In fact, ironically, if you are not actively debating wher the buddha was right you are not in fact following his teachings. For a true buddhist, the discussions should be revolve around wheter the buddha was right - not who has the correct interpretation.

Is there any other source other than theravada literature to learn about early buddhist teachings. mahayana is after all twisted versions with chinese and japanese local believes , and they devoloped way later. so which texts you or any other expert comparing with.maybe hindu texts or something?

The Buddha achieved nirvana (extinction) and no longer exists!

What doing your homework looks like :)

Theravada is the most pragmatic. It is less dogmatic .but not without some dogma Tibetan Buddhism seems like Hinduism with a Buddhist face.

In what way does a 'Buddhism of the Early Buddhist Texts' exist yet? See: in what way does a 'Buddhism of the Early Buddhist Texts' exist yet? It is already: a TOPIC held in mind in analysing Buddhist texts. See "how Theravada differs from Early Buddhism' an APPROACH TO PRACTICE. See 'a swift pair of messengers'. A CHANGE IN SOCIAL BEHAVIOR. See 'Bhikkhuni Vinaya Studies', But is this 'distinction in outlook REFLECTED IN SOCIAL INSTITUTION, like a Sangha or Self Identified Group of thonkets, like the DADA movement or the Green Party and Movement? I am maybe waiting for bus that will never come.

Hello everyone : are jhanas real ?

i think it rubbed me the wrong way. felt a slight tingle in my taint.

Teravada say Nibbana

Bhakti Ananda Goswami does well arguing that earliest Buddhism was devotional as it was originally a Vaishnava lineage. What do you think of his work?

Theravada reminds me of catholicism, your not the finished article but if you work hard you will get there. Mayhana is that you were already are the finished article you just don't know it yet. Both are attempts by a you for a better version of you, sadly destined to fail as there is no you....

Completely wrong about Abhidharma...In sutra pitaka also there are mentionings about abhidharma..Please read Ven.Anandas thera gathas-buddhas closest disciple. He says "here is 84000 teachings of buddha.. I learnt 82000 of them from Buddha him self..and 2000 from other Disciples..." In tripitaka teachings Sutra pitaka=21000 Vinaya pitaka=21000 Abhidharma= 42000 So here we can see ven. Ananda knew 82000 which means most of( complete) Abhidharma pitaka as well.. So please dont misguide people about Abhidharma...It is the purest Teaching of Buddha..only buddha is the person who can develop such great teaching set which contains 42000 teachings with no contradictions among them and no contradiction with sutra and vinaya pitakas as well..

Buddha was not a Buddhist and he did not teach Buddhism, he only taught dhamma vridhamma org

There is no legitimate question that the Pali requires jhana practice. It is mentioned countless times and always when it counts, such as the 8-fold path. Inevitably in a text of this length, there are going to be some inconsistencies, and there are the stories where someone gets enlightened after hearing a talk. But the argument that there is a legitimate question in this regard is unserious. There is a legitimate question about what the lack of enlightened westerners says about the practice.

ISLAM ≠ Arabianity(sunni shia sufi) Arabianity Sunni = salafi wahabi... like a:- ISLAM ≠ Buddhism (theravada mahayana vajrayana) Buddhism's follower will follow not Gautama(pbuh). Arabianity's follower will follow not Muhammad(pbuh). Follower of ISLAM will follow both Gautama(pbuh) & Muhammad(pbuh) ISLAM = DHAMMA arabic pali Nabi Dhulkifl = Gautama Buddha Nabi Muhammad = Metteyya Buddha

Buddha is too bc with spread his teaching to anyone who have fate in buddhahood. His younger brother who follow buddha everywhere and still not obtain arahant yet and buddha give order to all monks to not speak to his younger brother after buddha go to nirvana. Buddha give order to high rank monk to make abidhidama. But if it doesn't have his younger brother than it is impossible to made. Later few days later his younger brother of buddha gautama obtain arahant and organize monk and create dhama to us like today. Buddha set buddhism have age 5000years and it is over. Abidhidama never made during every buddha life time because it is the role of arahant to create it. Sadly western doesn't know what is arahant? They think nirvana is easy to go 😂🎉 like they pray their god. It is completely ridiculous.