Что такое Тхеравада

Автор Ассаджи, 19:58 15 октября 2012

« назад - далее »


Статья Питера Скиллинга "Тхеравада в истории"


Русский перевод:





Цитата: Ассаджи от 19:20 26 октября 2012

О происхождении названия Тхеравада в его основном современном значении:

At the World Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1893, Japanese monks – led by Rev. Ashitsu Jitsuzen – counter-attacked, arguing that the "northern" school was more developed, while the "southern" was backward and stunted. They proposed that the proper terms were Mahayana and Hinayana, the big and little vehicle, with the implied hierarchy. Their suggestion stuck. Ten years later, an Irishman who ordained as a monk in Burma and had ambitions to convert the West to Buddhism – Ven. Ananda Metteya (Allan Bennett), proposed "Theravada" as a less demeaning title than Hinayana. Only in 1950 at the first meeting of the World Fellowship of Buddhists was this proposal formally adopted, and has since become so well accepted that its recent origin has been almost totally forgotten.



Цитата: Ассаджи от 19:20 26 октября 2012
Книга под редакцией Питера Скиллинга "How Theravāda is Theravāda? Exploring Buddhist Identities":


Об исходном значении слова - перевод отрывка Параджика-канда-аттхакатхи (I 231) в статье Руперта Гетина "Was Buddhaghosa a Theravadin?"

"'The view of the teachers' (ācariyavāda) refers to the series of expositions of meaning (aṭṭhakathā) constituted by the judgements passed down separately from the canonical text and established by the 500 arahats who were compilers of the Teaching. 'Individual opinion' refers to exposition in a form established by one's own inference, reasoning and good understanding separate from Sutta, the principles of Sutta, and the tradition of teachers. The entire [body of] opinion of elders (sabbo theravādo) that has come down in the commentaries to the Suttanta, Abhidhamma and Vinaya is also called 'individual opinion'. But in adopting an individual opinion one should explain it without holding to it stubbornly and come to a conclusion; the evidence should be explained by considering the meaning of the canonical text and applying the meaning to the canonical text; individual opinion should fit with the view of the teachers; if it fits and agrees with this, it should be accepted; but if it does not fit and agree, it should not be accepted. For it is individual opinion that is certainly weakest of all; the view of the teachers is firmer, but is also should fit with the principles of Sutta; when it fits and agrees with this it should be accepted, otherwise it should not; the principles of Sutta are firmer than the view of the teachers."

Ācariyavādo nāma dhammasaṅgāhakehi pañcahi arahantasatehi ṭhapitā pāḷivinimuttā okkantavinicchayappavattā aṭṭhakathātanti.

Attanomati nāma sutta-suttānuloma-ācariyavāde muñcitvā anumānena attano anubuddhiyā nayaggāhena upaṭṭhitākārakathanaṃ.

Apica suttantābhidhammavinayaṭṭhakathāsu āgato sabbopi theravādo ''attanomati'' nāma. Taṃ pana attanomatiṃ gahetvā kathentena na daḷhaggāhaṃ gahetvā voharitabbaṃ. Kāraṇaṃ sallakkhetvā atthena pāḷiṃ, pāḷiyā ca atthaṃ saṃsanditvā kathetabbaṃ. Attanomati ācariyavāde otāretabbā. Sace tattha otarati ceva sameti ca, gahetabbā. Sace neva otarati na sameti, na gahetabbā. Ayañhi attanomati nāma sabbadubbalā. Attanomatito ācariyavādo balavataro.

Ācariyavādopi suttānulome otāretabbo. Tattha otaranto samentoyeva gahetabbo, itaro na gahetabbo. Ācariyavādato hi suttānulomaṃ balavataraṃ.



The modern use of the term seems to derive originally from the British civil servant George Turnour in Sri Lanka in 1836; the first uses of the phrase 'Theravāda Buddhism' seem to have been by the Thai Prince Chudadharn at the Chicago World's Parliament of Religions in 1893 (though it was not used there by the much more influential speaker Anagarika Dharmapala), and by the western monk Ananda Maitreya (Allen Bennett) in an article in the Bulletin de l'École française d'extrème-orient in 1907 (he wrote of 'le pur Boudhisme de l'ecole Theravada').

'Theravāda civilization(s)'? Periodizing its history. Steven Collins


Из Махавамсы:

A then known by the name Mahatissa, who had frequented the families of laymen, was expelled by the brotherhood from our monastery for this fault, the frequenting of lay-families. His disciple, the them who was known as Bahalamassutissa, went in anger to the Abhayagiri (vihãra) and abode there, forming a (separate) faction. And thenceforward these bhikkhus came no more to the Mahavihara: thus did the bhikkhus of the Abhayagiri (vihãra) secede from the Theravada. From the monks of the Abhayagiri -vihara those of the Dakkhina-vihara separated (afterwards); in this wise those bhikkhus (who had seceded) from the adherents of the Theravada were divided into two (groups).




Из Дипавансы, в переводе Ольденберга:

There were, besides, many other great Theras who were original depositaries (of the Faith). By these and other saintly Theras who had fulfilled their duties, to the number of five hundred, was the collection of the Dhamma and the Vinaya made; because it was collected by the Theras, it is called the doctrine of the Theras (theravāda). They composed the collection of the Dhamma and of the whole Vinaya by consulting Upāli about the Vinaya and learned Ānanda about the Dhamma ... who had obtained perfection in the true Doctrine, had learned the Dhamma and Vinaya from the Jina; ... Having received the perfect word (of Buddha), the first (among doctrines), from the first (among teachers), these Theras and original depositaries (of the Faith) made the first collection. Hence this doctrine of the Theras is also called the first (or primitive) doctrine. The most excellent Theravāda remained pure and faultless for a long time, for ten times ten years.



Цитата из введения,
книга Theravada Buddhism Continuity, Diversity, and Identity
Kate Crosby © 2014

Problems with the Definition of "Theravada Buddhism"

Theravada Buddhism's reputation for being the earliest surviving form of Buddhism is developed in contrast to other forms of Buddhism, which are labeled "Mahayana" and "Vajrayana." These are the umbrella terms commonly used for the Buddhisms of East Asia and Central Asia/the Himalayas, respectively.

Those who become more familiar with any of these forms of Buddhism quickly realize that these categories are not fixed, exclusive, or comprehensive entities. In fact, there are deep problems with such categorization, which can make us blind to the fluidity, complexity, diversity, and richness of any actual manifestation of Buddhism in real people and communities. To label and define the living traditions that have emerged from two and a half millennia of history in this way is a form of essentialism. Essentialism, while often a useful tool of classification, can at its worst be a sinister tool of control.

In fact, it is only in the modern period that the term thera-vāda, literally "doctrine of the senior monks," came to be equated with the community religion of this region, becoming its official designation at the World Fellowship of Buddhists in 1950 (Perreira 2012: 561). The term sthavira/thera "senior monk" and its parallels in other languages were used by several branches of Buddhism, in their attempts to classify Buddhist divergence, to refer to an early division within the Buddhist fold between two groups: the sthaviras, and, usually, the Mahāsaṃghikas (Bareau 1955/2013: 23). The doctrinal positions preserved in the earliest layers of Theravada texts as well as Theravada's own historiography places it as a development within the sthavira side of that division. Within one branch of  sthavira/thera Buddhism, the Mahāvihāra in Anuradhapura in Sri Lanka in the fifth-century ce, that is, 1000 years after the death of the historical Buddha, the term thera-vāda was used to refer to the teachings of senior monks, particularly those senior monks who gathered together immediately after the Buddha's death at a meeting called "the first council." The phrase was used in this way by the Mahāvihāra as it was codifying the preservation of its teachings (including the Pali Canon). The purpose of compiling these accounts of the first council at that point was to attribute to the Buddha's immediate disciples and their successors a process of rehearsing and recording the Buddha's teachings and rules in such detail that it could authorize the Pali Canon as it was rehearsed at the Mahāvihāra all those centuries later. The Mahāvihāra tradition also attributed to those early enlightened disciples the extensive commentaries that it had begun to systematize and "retranslate" into Pali at that time, the fifth-century ce. In the twelfth century, the Mahāvihāra monastic tradition came to dominate the Buddhism of Sri Lanka and would in turn strongly influence the textual and ordination lineages of Southeast Asia, across the forms of Buddhism that came at a later date still to be termed Theravada. Its claim to the authority of preserving the doctrine of the early senior monks was consolidated through a further period of reviewing this textual transmission and writing additional commentaries and handbooks.

The account of the first council, coupled with that of later councils, especially the third council connected with Asoka (mentioned earlier), validates the Pali Canon and commentaries, as the ultimate scriptural authority for Theravada Buddhism today. This in turn allows for the corresponding claim to earliness and authenticity on the part of Theravada. However, it is clear that the texts and the stories of their authenticity were the work of centuries. Moreover, there are also many other texts, written, visual, and aural, in many languages and media, that inform Theravada Buddhism as it is now practiced and as it was practiced over the centuries. Like other forms of Buddhism, what we now term Theravada is the process and product of two and a half millennia since the historical person referred to as the Buddha began preaching the teachings and institutions from which all forms of Buddhism developed. Within Theravada we frequently find doctrines, interpretations, and practices that have been more closely associated with Mahayana and Vajrayana. While these could be put down to the influence of Mahayana and Vajrayana on Theravada, the concept of Theravada as the religion of a community, ethnic group, and even nationality as a whole is a recent development. For most of the history of Buddhism, distinctions of doctrine and textual authority have been a matter of concern for a minority of scholars and practitioners, often coming to a head at points of crisis. The history of Buddhism in the region we now identify as Theravada shows different doctrinal and practice groups existing alongside and intertwined with one another. The current dominance of what is now defined as "Theravada" is the result of a number of factors, including which monasteries won in competitions to win royal sponsorship in the medieval period; and how Buddhist history came to be written at points of marked identity formation, that is, when big political changes led a group or community to redefine themselves. Key periods when this happened differ from region to region, but the eleventh to twelfth centuries marked one such watershed, as also did the nineteenth to twentieth centuries.

The definitions of Theravada that formed in the nineteenth to twentieth centuries owe much to changing conceptions of religion, rationality, science, and identity. Definitions of sameness and contrast became important in marking territory, ensuring allegiance and bolstering status at a marked period of shifting and contested power relations globally. This general picture has been complicated by and has interacted with Western Buddhist Studies scholarship that from the nineteenth through into the late twentieth centuries was also seeking to differentiate Buddhist traditions and schools and in the main did so on a purely doctrinal basis. The locus classicus that brought together the research that had been conducted in relation to the early schools of Buddhism by the time of its publication and went on to be the basis of further refinement in this area is the work of Andre Bareau (1955/2013). In it Theravada is identified as a later subgroup of the early schools emerging from the sthavira side of a conjectured early split between Sthavira and Mahāsaṃghika factions. Bareau then defines Theravada purely by the 222 doctrinal theses claimed as "orthodox" in the Abhidhamma book, the Kathāvatthu, compiled at the third council, even while observing how different the lived Theravada of different regions was on the ground (1955/2013: 275–326). East Asian and Western understandings of Theravada in this way, and the concomitant association of it with pre-Mahayana Buddhism, led to it being labeled as one of the Hīnayāna "inferior vehicle" schools, a pejorative term found in Mahayana sūtras to refer to the Buddhism of the opponents in those sūtras. It was in reaction to this identification that representatives from what was then termed the "Southern" branch of Buddhism began from the end of the nineteenth century to grapple with how to refer to the branch(es) of Buddhism represented in Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia (Perreira 2012: 510ff.), a process that led to the decision cited earlier to adopt Theravada as a collective label.

Rather than try to untangle the extent to which "Theravada" is thera-vāda, this book accepts the fluid definitions of Theravada to be found implicitly and explicitly among the people who identify themselves as Theravada Buddhists now and in recent history. It also accepts the fluid definitions of the Dhamma (truth), sāsana (transmitted teachings and associated institutions), and community (human and nonhuman) of those who contributed to the creation and continuity of the forms and manifestations of Buddhism on which "Theravada Buddhists" have been able to draw. What they believe(d), practice(d), and regard(ed) as authoritative is accepted here as Theravada belief, practice, and authority. This book therefore draws on a range of media and approaches, including fieldwork, for the evidence of what constitutes Theravada today. It draws on the evidence of texts and archeology for the views of those communities of the past that contributed to the current construction of Theravada.

Mostly the evidence we have for the past comes from textual collections preserved primarily by monks. While rich and diverse, such texts reflect the perspective of a minority, literate, usually monastic, usually male group, although shaped by the full range of humans and other beings and institutions with whom and which they interacted. This means that while the book aims to consider the views of animals and other beings as well as humans, children as well as adults, women as well as men, laypeople as well as monastics, and nuns as well as monks, the nature of the available evidence means that this quest is inherently doomed to failure. This particular challenge is greater for the past than for the present.

The fact that many Theravada Buddhists accept the idea that their form of Buddhism is earlier than other forms allows for debates over what is "true" or "orthodox" Theravada and what is "heterodox," in spite of the absence of a central authority for this issue either in the past or present since the Buddha himself "discarded his lifespan." Such debates are considered and questioned in this book in relation to the topics of the individual chapters. At the same time, there is no fixed distinction out there in the real world between Buddhist and non-Buddhist practices. For example, practices using protective string and recalling the spirits in Laos are found among those who identify themselves as Buddhists and those who do not. Feeding of ancestors is similarly found throughout Southeast Asia, among Buddhist and non-Buddhist families alike. Buddhists in Sri Lanka may find occasion to attend a Christian church whose patron saint has a reputation for assisting with matters of employment and Sri Lankan Catholic employees will allow their wrists to be bound with protective Buddhist string when prompted by an occasion at their workplace.

Distinctions between Buddhist and non-Buddhist practices can help us organize our knowledge and understand what we see. Yet what begins as a conceptual prop may then become a hindrance to a deeper understanding of the subject. In an inclusive study, which sees "what Buddhists do" as "Buddhist," such distinctions are difficult to address. On the one hand, we can analyze the history, political contexts, and rivalry that led scholars and reform Buddhists to emphasize some views and practices while rejecting others. We become wary of attempts to discard the constantly adapted practices and fluid pantheon of Theravada as we grow wise to agenda of exclusion and essentialism. In the case of the Buddhist pantheon, attempts – with varying degrees of success and failure – have been and continue to be made to exclude deities that can also be found in spirit religions, animism, and Hinduism. This is an agenda that relies on recent labels. The resulting categorization of these aspects of religious expression in the region is ahistorical. On the other hand, pragmatically we have to set ourselves some boundaries in order to limit even an inclusive study. One possible avenue is to define as Buddhist those practices that in some way make use of the Buddhist pantheon, Buddhist terminology, or the Buddhist Sangha (monastic community), but this immediately proves too narrow. Many rituals performed by Theravada Buddhists, such as those for fertility, childbirth, childhood, and female coming of age, make little reference to Buddhist doctrine, terms, or monks, but they shape the lives of Buddhists and may shape Buddhist ritual. Moreover, the rituals and practices of Buddhists are constantly reconfigured. This is very  visibly true also of the pantheon. The Buddhist pantheon is a slow moving family of members, some similar, some disparate. While all nominally accept the Buddha as the head of the family, old members jostle with or  welcome new arrivals, and it is not always the same who come and go, who form the heart of the action or stand at the sidelines. This book has not mastered these issues, but has tried to identify them where they impact each topic under consideration.

This book, then, explores the histories, texts, teachings, soteriological practices, social organizations, and rituals of Theravada, especially as found in Sri Lanka and mainland Southeast Asia. It touches on its aural and visual representations, and seeks to place what we see in its political context. In each chapter, a different aspect of Theravada is examined, with an eye to the continuities one may detect covered within the diversity that falls under the broad umbrella term of Theravada. Each chapter explores an aspect of how Theravada is defined by and is used to define the individuals and societies that accept it as an identifying label. The purpose of this book is to orient its readers such that they may contextualize any aspect of Theravada teaching, history, culture, or practice that they encounter. As such this book offers a broad overview. However, the book also aims to provide readers with sufficient detail that they are not taken unawares by the potentially bewildering array that makes up Theravada. This book therefore offers much detail to illustrate the great diversity of Theravada, historically and in the present, while suggesting how such details may relate to the overall picture. Of course, this book cannot cover every aspect or every angle, nor every historical turn taken, but it aims to map out sufficient highways and contours to make the reader's initial journey a smooth one. While seeking to err on the side of landmarks and highlights, the book also aims to draw the readers' attention to sufficient further guides for their own onward explorations.



О том, что существование "учения старейшин" зафиксировано в китайских переводах конца четвертого века:

From: "Dan Lusthaus"
List Editor: Franz Metcalf
Editor's Subject: Re: QUERY>Modern use of "Theravada" (Lusthaus)
Author's Subject: Re: QUERY>Modern use of "Theravada" (Skilling)
Date Written: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 09:23:59 -0800
Date Posted: Sun, 23 Dec 2006 12:23:59 -0500

Just to complicate things a bit, if we put aside the additional concern of using "Theravada" (or any sectarian name) as a designation for lay and/or geographic communities in contradistinction to simply naming a monastic lineage, then the Chinese tradition does seem to attest to the term Thera-school.

If we look, for instance, at the three Chinese translations of Vasumitra's "Development of the Different Schools," which, unfortunately does not survive in Sanskrit or an Indic language, we find the following:

1. Xuanzang (T.2031) uses 上座部 shangzuobu to designate the Theravada school. Shangzuo literally means "High-Seated," and is a common term for Thera/Sthavira. Bu means a "school" or "sect" or something of that sort, and can correspond to --vaada (e.g., Sarvaastivaada is commonly rendered in Chinese as yiqieyou bu 一切有部 "everything exists school"). Of course, this is a translation, not a transliteration or transcription.

2. Kumarajiva (T.2032; the Taisho [mis-]attributes this to Paramartha) does give us a transliteration: 體毘履 which in modern pronunciation would be: ti pi lü. Someone better versed in early fifth century Chinese phonetics may be able to suggest how that sounded back then. However it sounded, its initial consonant was a -t-, not -sth-. Kumarajiva explains the term with another common term for Thera/sthavira, laosu 老宿 which means "elder." His gloss is (此言老宿唯老宿人同會共出律部也). So its meaning is not in doubt.

3. Paramartha (T.2033), in his version of Vasumitra, offers two forms of the name, both being translations rather than transliterations:

大德眾 da de zhong (Great Venerables)
上座弟子部 shangzuo dizi bu (High-Seat and Disciples School)

The first name is meant to convey Thera as an honorific (which is one of the common uses, even in Chinese translations). The second is interesting, since while Xuanzang (as is typical in Chinese) only indicates the "High-seated Ones" (shangzuo), Paramartha adds dizi "disciples", i.e., the high-seated (i.e., teachers) and their disciples. So we are not yet including laypersons, but he is clearly indicating that the term is not meant to be restricted only to actual "elders."

This would suggest that by Vasumitra's day the term Thera (-vada) was already a common designation. His text, of course, is one of the classic sources for the narrative by which the first schism involved the splitting off of Mahasanghikas from the Theras, and that later Sarvastivada also split from the Theras. According to him, the Vatsiputriyas split from the Sarvastivada, and each continued to engender further schisms or sectarian splits. But Thera-vada (if we can take the Chinese bu as an equivalent of vaada) remains consistent. This, of course, is centuries before Buddhaghosa.

In addition, the Foguang Dictionary (p. 719c) lists some additional transliterations (I've added canonical citations):

1. 銅鍱部  modern pronunctiation = tong ye bu.  [cf. T.54.2128.646c 一切經音義]

2. 他鞞羅部 modern pronunciation = ta bi luo bu. [cf. ibid, 784b; also Guanding's commentary on the MahaNirvana Sutra T.1767.194c, re: the initial schism:

佛滅度後一百餘年育王設會。上座shangzuo 他鞞羅tabiluo
不同。分為二部。後上座部shangzuo bu...]

In other words, Guanding (Tiantai Zhiyi's disciple and editor, 6th-7th c) initially gives the name BOTH in translation and transliteration (High-seated + tabiluo), and then continues with the translated version as a bu/vaada.

3. 體毘履 ti pi lü (this was what Kumarajiva used, as noted above).

4. 他毘利 ta pi li [cf. T.55.2149.262a 大唐內典錄: 他毘利律(他毘利齊言宿德見僧祐錄)]

If we take the transliterations -- tabiluo, tipilü, and tapili -- and stress the middle syllable, while also taking bi/pi as an approximation for Indic -vi- , then, while they begin with an initial T- sound rather than an S- or Sth-, we get stha-VI-ra (sthavira).

So we may consider both terms (Thera- and Sthavira- "school") as attested in China at least since the end of the fourth century, and, if we can trust the Chinese representations of Vasumitra, in use in India four to five centuries earlier than that.

Dan Lusthaus



Цитата: Ассаджи от 20:41 12 ноября 2013
Из Дипавансы, в переводе Ольденберга:

There were, besides, many other great Theras who were original depositaries (of the Faith). By these and other saintly Theras who had fulfilled their duties, to the number of five hundred, was the collection of the Dhamma and the Vinaya made; because it was collected by the Theras, it is called the doctrine of the Theras (theravāda). They composed the collection of the Dhamma and of the whole Vinaya by consulting Upāli about the Vinaya and learned Ānanda about the Dhamma ... who had obtained perfection in the true Doctrine, had learned the Dhamma and Vinaya from the Jina; ... Having received the perfect word (of Buddha), the first (among doctrines), from the first (among teachers), these Theras and original depositaries (of the Faith) made the first collection. Hence this doctrine of the Theras is also called the first (or primitive) doctrine. The most excellent Theravāda remained pure and faultless for a long time, for ten times ten years.

Еще из Дипавансы:

Sattarasa bhinnavādā ekavādo abhinnako,
Sabbeva'ṭṭhārasa honti 'bhinnavādena te saha,
Nigrodhova mahārukkho theravādānamuttamo
Anūnama'nadhikaṃ ce'va kevalaṃ jinasāsanaṃ,
Kaṇṭakā ciya rukkhamhi nibbattā vādasesakā.

Seventeen are the schismatic sects, and there is one that is not schismatic;
together with that which is not schismatic, they are eighteen in all.
That of the Theravādins, which is even like a great banyan tree, is the most excellent:
the complete teaching of the Conqueror, free from omissions or admissions.
The other schools arose as thorns grow on the tree.

(Dīpavaṁsa 4.90-91)

Из комментария к Катхаваттху:

In that second century only two schools seceded from the Theravāda: the (1) Mahiṃsāsakas and the (2) Vajjiputtakas.

Now seceding from the Vajjiputtakas four other schools arose: the (3) Dhammuttariyas, the (4) Bhadrayānikas, the (5) Channāgarikas and the (6) Saṃmitiyas. Again, in that second century, seceding from the Mahiṃsāsakas, two schools arose: the (7) Sabbatthivādins and the (8) Dhammaguttikas. Then again, falling off from the Sabbatthivādins, arose the (9) Kassapikas. And the Kassapikas splitting up, the (10) Saṅkantikas came into existence. The Saṅkantikas splitting up, there arose the (11) Suttavādins. Thus, falling off from the Theravādins, arose these eleven schools. These together with the Theravādins were twelve.


Цитата: Ассаджи от 22:49 06 декабря 2014
О том, что существование "учения старейшин" зафиксировано в китайских переводах конца четвертого века:

From: "Dan Lusthaus"
List Editor: Franz Metcalf
Editor's Subject: Re: QUERY>Modern use of "Theravada" (Lusthaus)

Обсуждение современного использования термина "Тхеравада" на конференции буддологов

Modern use of "Theravada"



'Theravāda civilization(s)'? Periodizing its history.
Steven Collins
University of Chicago


Ученые, изучающие Тхераваду, могут зарегистрироваться для участия в обсуждении традиций Тхеравады: http://theravadaciv.org/about/


Сергей О. пишет:

ЦитироватьBuddhists in fifteenth-century Ramaññadesa (or lower Myanmar/Burma) supplemented doctrinally based self-representations of dhammavādī (professing the true doctrine) and vibhajjavādī (professing the doctrine which analyzes), which were substitutes for Theravāda in the Kalyāṇī Inscriptions


Есть буддизм в Бирме, Шри-Ланке, Тайланде, Кампучии, имеющий общий канон на одном и том же языке - пали. Есть общий корпус литературы, который создавался на протяжении всего времени существования буддизма (если считать вместе с каноном) - комментарии, субкомментарии, и другие труды от древности, в средние века и в наше время. Есть общие практики и виная.
Сам термин "тхеравада" известен издревле, но мало употреблялся в качестве понятия для самоидентификации. Чаще называли себя лет 200 назад, если чуть упростить, просто буддистами (дхаммавади). Термин стал более широко использоваться в 19-20 вв., особенно после съезда буддистов в 1950-ых гг.
Что пишут в этой обширной цитате Стивена Берквица? Что для адекватного изучения исторического буддизма следует учитывать не только палийские тексты, но и народный буддизм. Что есть национальные особенности в буддизме тхеравады разных стран.
В общем ничего сногсшибательного и переворачивающего известное с ног на голову нет. Конечно, сам буддизм тут древний, хотя используемый для его названия термин используется в этом качестве не так давно.


ЦитироватьWhile the term may have been used in a more restrictive sense prior to the modern period, to posit that it was an unfamiliar designation found in some texts seems to be an overstatement. The association with the monastic tradition with theras appears well established, and the appearance of "Theravāda" in ancient texts shows that the term did not require any special explanation or gloss. It may be more accurate to conclude that although "Theravāda" was not a common way to describe a Buddhist identity prior to the twentieth century, it was still recognizable as one way to designate the lines of continuity in texts and practices associated with monastic lineages that espoused the teachings of ancient theras and, by extension, the Buddha himself.

"Хотя этот термин использовался в более ограниченном смысле до современного периода, утверждать, что он был неизвестным обозначением, обнаруженным в некоторых текстах, представляется преувеличением. Связь с монашеской традицией с тхерами представляется хорошо установленной и появление "тхеравады" в древних текстах показвыает, что термин не требует какого-то специального пояснения. Наверное более точно будет заключить, что хотя "Тхеравада" не был общепринятым способом описания буддийской идентичности до 20 века, он, тем не менее, был распознаваемым, как один из способов обозначения непрерывной линии в текстах и практиках, связанных с линией монашеского посвящения, которые излагают учение древних тхер и, расширительно, самого Будды".


Название тхеравада, как пишут, постепенно распространялось с 19 века. Но я не удивлюсь, если и сейчас где-нибудь в глубинке Тайланда используется выражение "учение Будды", а не тхеравада. Собственно это название нужно для отличения от других направлений буддизма. А раньше, когда международных контактов было меньше, вопрос о существовании других школ стоял не так актуально, вполне нормально было называть буддизм просто учением Будды, просто Дхаммой. Я уже написал, что (в большой цитате пишут, что) раньше буддистов называли (в Бирме кажется по цитате) "дхаммавади" - учителя дхаммы.


О названии "тхеравада" вместо "хинаяна" говорил на одном из начальных (или первом) собрании World Fellowship of Buddhists Малаласекера в 1950 г. в Канди. В эту организацию входят не только тхеравадины, но и представители ваджраяны и дзен (и вероятно других школ). А вообще это название прослеживается уже в начале 20 века, как пишут в обзоре опять же "How Theravada is Theravada"


Цитата: Сергей О. от 14:03 28 декабря 2015Но я не удивлюсь, если и сейчас где-нибудь в глубинке Тайланда используется выражение "учение Будды", а не тхеравада.

Во всей Юго-Восточной Азии говорят именно об "учении Будды" (Будда-сасана). Например, в автобусе в Бангкоке горожанин именно так мне рассказывал об Учении. Разве что высокообразованные азиатские буддисты разбираются в том, что такое Тхеравада. Да и они не называют себя "тхеравадинами". Так себя называют именно западные последователи Учения, ориентируясь в основном на западную реконструкцию, с "mindfulness/achtsamkeit", "очищением от культурных наслоений", "возвратом к первоисточникам".
Да и то для более точной идентификации сейчас все больше используются названия "випассана", "ранний буддизм", "секулярный буддизм", "социально вовлеченный буддизм" и т.п. Так что название "Тхеравада" становится снова мало востребованным, и используется прежде всего как общее обозначение течений буддизма, ориентированных на Палийский канон и Комментарии.

    Аякова Жаргал Аюшиевна

The Direction of Buddhism in America today




The name given to the Buddhist Canon as compiled by the Elders at the Rājagaha Council (Mahāvamsa iii.40).

"Now since the canon was compiled by the theras it was called the Thera tradition.' The theras who had held the First Council and had (thereby) brought great blessing to the world, having lived their allotted span of life, entered, all, into nibbana."


It was considered the most orthodox; from it seventeen other schools branched off from time to time in later ages, as a result of schisms in the Order (Mahāvamsa v.1f).

The followers of Theravādā are called Theravādins (E.g., Cūlavamsa xxxviii.37) and their succession, Theravamsa (E.g., Cūlavamsa lii.46; liv.46).



The Advent  of  Theravada  Buddhism to  Mainland  South-east  Asia



Цитата: Ассаджи от 19:58 15 октября 2012
Статья Питера Скиллинга "Тхеравада в истории"


Русский перевод:

Тхеравада: термин и традиция в историческом контексте