[Buddha-l] Devadatta the Renegade: The Thruth History of Buddhism

[Joy Vriens]

Benito Carral wrote:

>    I  think that you are a Westerner involved in such a
> project  and,  since  I'm  a  Westerner  too, I hope to
> contribute  to  your  happiness  having  said that. :-)
> However  I  was  not  specifically thinking in you, but
> bringing to our post a contemporary trend.

I have no project other than my curiosity. When I don't understand 
anything, or when something looks absurd or contradictory, I can't help 
but sticking my long and pointed nose in it. I don't do anything 
specific with that information.

>>But  it  doesn't  make  sense  to  me that he had the
>>authority  that  you  want to give him right from the
>>start.

>    What   are  you  points  to  doubt  the  traditional
> Buddhist history?

Call it a blessed intuition ;-)

Coming back to democracy, in Reginald Ray's book mentioned by Brad, Ray 
goes into detail about the fomenting of a schism by Devadatta. He tries 
to convince the other bhikkus to join him and they do so by using 
Salaaka voting sticks or tickets... Devadatta says:"If these five 
[ascetic rules] are pleasing to the venerable ones, let each one take a 
voting ticket."

Well, either Devadatta invented democracy there and then on the spot, or 
the habit of voting with Salaaka already existed among groups of 
renunciants. And if it did, then why shouldn't the Buddha have used it too?

>>>It  seems quite clear to me that the problem is that
>>>westerners  can  not  and want not to admit that the
>>>Old Guy had a different agenda.

>    It's  my  experience  with students that they try to
> fit  Buddhism  into  their  lives  instead of fit their
> lives into Buddhism.

But isn't that what everybody (with basic sanity) does? Religions and 
philosophy are tools for a better life, not the other way round.

>>Well, if they were there in the 7th century, then the
>>Devadatta issue was more than simply about "a jealous
>>cousin"  and  then  it  perhaps did play an important
>>role in early Buddhism.

>    Do  you have any evidence to support your claim that
> Devadatta played an important role in early Buddhism?

Yes thanks to Brad. ;-) See "Reginald Ray's superb analysis of
Devadatta as condemned forest ascetic in his *Buddhist Saints in
India*, pp. 162-178."

>    The  traditional  Buddhist history also tell us that
> Devadatta   repented   and   asked   the   Buddha   for
> forgiveness.

The traditional Buddhist history (saddharmapu.n.dariika) also tells us 
that in a previous life Devadatta was the Buddha's teacher.

>>And  what  about  all  those  suttas where the Buddha
>>rests  his back against a tree and Sariputta teaches,
>>after which the Buddha says "Well said Sariputta".

>    I  prefer  to  think that the sangha was too big and
> that  the Old Guy was wise enough to delegate some work
> to such two wonderful attendants as they.

Which would show that he wasn't that authoritarian after all.

What pleads in favour of my naughty fantasy on Devadatta and Sariputta's 
existence after the Buddha's death is that Devadatta, still according to 
Reginal Rey, isn't mentioned in the earliest core of the skandhaka 
discussion of the Sa.mghabheda. He suggests that the Devadatta schism 
arose after the death of the Buddha, but also after the split between 
Mahasamghikas and Sthaviras. Isn't that interesting, if one considers 
everything that Sariputta did with Devadatta and said to and about him?

>    Some  times  I ask one of my old students to explain
> some  points to our little sangha. In fact, this year I
> will  ask  one  of them to take care of new students in
> their first year.

Well, Sariputta's position is somewhat different in that he gives 
further explanations and perhaps even introduces new elements (I 
imagine) to the Buddha's teaching, after which the Buddha gives his 
approval.

>>I  have  plenty  more ideas about a Buddhist Da Vinci
>>Code, but this will do for today. ;-)
> 
> 
>    Hahaha.  In  fact,  I  have  also started a new book
> titled,  "Devadatta  the Renegade: The Truth History of
> Buddhism." :-)

Too late. The Buddhist tradition has already written it.

>>>But  Buddhist  history, as any other history, is not
>>>written by minorities.
> 
> 
>>The  eldest  history  was written by those minorities
>>who  were  first  inclined  to write, i.e. rather the
>>Sariputtas than the Devadattas.
> 
> 
>    And  what did happen with Devedatta's followers? Did
> they  all  attained  parinibbana  at once and the order
> disappeared with them without leaving any trace?

Devadatta's attainments were initially praised by Sariputta and Ananda. 
His followers who practised Forest Buddhism apparently ended up settling 
in monasteries too. After that, they shared the same fate as Buddhism in 
that they disappeared. If only they had invested more in export like 
Buddhism...

Joy