I'm listening to Nibbana Sermons by Bhikkhu Analayo. He mentions that Nama can't include consciousness as that would make consciousness self-conditioned.

Could someone explain why that is? It can be included under Nama and still be conditioned by the other aggregates can it not?

Thank you for reading!

I'm mainly in Theravada but I'm interested in Early Buddhism. Where should I start? What suttas or books do you recommend?

And also, is modern Theravada the closest to early Buddhism?

Any guidance on best translations where to buy?

New here. I wonder which monasteries and organizations are representing themselves as established in Early Buddhism, by holding this view of difference of Theravada and early buddhism?

Did Gotama ever told people to worship his images or relics?

Thank you. Metta 🙏

​

​

​

As a Theravadin, I naturally consider the Pali Canon authoritative and the basis of my religious practice, along with the local Sangha.

Ever since I read about EBT's approach to the Teachings, it resonated with me a LOT, but the monastery and the nuns I'm connected with (and where I took refuge) are Theravada. I haven't asked their view about EBT yet (I'm gonna) but in any case I wouldn't want to break away from Theravada, they are an indispensable part of my practice.

So the question goes, is it common for EBT practitioners to associate with Theravada monasteries? Does an EBT practitioner clearly distinct themselves from Theravada? I think that this tradition is naturally closer to EBT than Mahayana.

What are the primary academic criteria used to distinguish Early Buddhism from later developments, especially figures like Nāgārjuna and Vasubandhu? How do texts, doctrines, and historical accounts play a role in this differentiation? Additionally, who is generally considered the last significant figure or teacher in the Early Buddhist period?

litmus test Buddhist interpretations

In several threads I have heard it said "so and so drifted away from the Buddha". For example, "this Sutra or this statement or these people have drifted away from the Buddha", ostensibly some lesser or greater distance.

I believe the simple sense of this is there is a group that has a consensus about several of the basic themes of Buddhism like dependent origination, name and form and other conceptual "litmus tests" which can be used to measure the distance of people's statements about Buddhism from the Buddha.

It would really help to have three or four of these litmus test Buddhist Concepts spelled out so I could use them myself or at least understand how they are used.

A book on meditation based on early Buddhism:

What You Might Not Know about Jhāna & Samādhi

​

Hello!

I’m wondering what your personal favourite work/book on Early Buddhism is.

Mine is The Buddhist Path to Awakening by R.M.L. Gethin.

Thanks!

Hi, I'm curious what the early texts had to say about Hell exactly. Are the Hells or certain ideas about the Hells from the earliest scriptures, or are they a later addition? I'm not gonna lie, I'm very averse to believing in Hell at all, since I'm basically an agnostic who doesn't believe in Hell, and going from that to believing that I may go to Hell in the next life as a result of previous bad karma is pretty stressful. And the specific descriptions of Hell seem a little silly and exaggeratingly frightening to me. Like I could believe in multiple worlds (or planets in the universe) with sentient beings that on the average suffer more, but the depictions of Hell in Buddhism that I've seen (what with demons torturing people and all) seem silly and seem like a tool to frighten people into becoming Buddhist. So I have a bias here, and I was hoping for a Buddhist perspective that doesn't include hells in it. Everything else in Buddhism seems very reasonable, except this idea.

Hello, all. Are there any, perhaps online, Early Buddhism-based sanghas?

Thanks.

​

As far as I understand Buddhism, I think craving for sensuality is a cause behind our suffering. And sensuality covers all the alluring and pleasant stuff derived through our senses, our ears being one of them. We hear pleasant music through our ears. So, is listening to music unskilful in the Buddhist path?

I’ve been reading some suttas of the Pali Canon, and I get confused between the defilements and effluents. I think, effluents are of three types. They lead to suffering or rebirths. And defilements, it seems to me that there are many. But, all of them are unskillful. What is the relationship between the two of them? Can anyone please clear my doubts?