Что такое Тхеравада

[Ассаджи]

Статья Питера Скиллинга "Тхеравада в истории"

http://enlight.lib.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-BJ011/bj011377404.11.pdf#page=65

Русский перевод:

https://webshus.ru/20079

[Ассаджи]

Книга под редакцией Питера Скиллинга "How Theravāda is Theravāda? Exploring Buddhist Identities":

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=12929
http://www.bangkokpost.com/print/314876/
http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=41492
http://www.silkwormbooks.com/catalog/info/how-theravada/
https://www.equinoxpub.com/journals/index.php/BSR/article/download/19523/15600

[Ассаджи]

http://www.bangkokpost.com/print/314876/

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.

http://budsas.blogspot.com/2013_05_01_archive.html

[Ассаджи]

Книга под редакцией Питера Скиллинга "How Theravāda is Theravāda? Exploring Buddhist Identities":

http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=12929
http://www.bangkokpost.com/print/314876/

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.

https://www.academia.edu/24142416/Was_Buddhaghosa_a_Therav%C4%81din_Buddhist_identity_in_the_Pali_commentaries_and_chronicles

[Ассаджи]

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
http://theravadaciv.org/field-debates/theravada-civilizations-periodizing-its-history/

[Ассаджи]

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).

http://lakdiva.org/mahavamsa/chap033.html

[Ассаджи]

Ajahn Sucitto
What is Theravāda?

http://ajahnsucitto.org/articles/what-is-theravada-2012/

[Ассаджи]

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.

https://archive.org/stream/dpavasaanancien00oldegoog#page/n142/mode/2up/

[Ассаджи]

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.

[Ассаджи]

О создании "буддизма" как "мировой религии" в девятнадцатом веке:

The Invention of World Religions: Or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism

Tomoko Masuzawa

http://books.google.com/books?id=Quu3VvTFnnAC&pg=PA121
https://books.google.com/books?id=OMku6YC9VPwC&pg=PA121
https://books.google.com/books?id=rImiH_z2taAC&pg=PA121
https://play.google.com/store/books/details/The_Invention_of_World_Religions_Or_How_European_U?id=Quu3VvTFnnAC
https://www.scribd.com/book/127126759/The-Invention-of-World-Religions-Or-How-European-Universalism-Was-Preserved-in-the-Language-of-Pluralism
https://www.amazon.com/Invention-World-Religions-Universalism-Preserved/dp/0226509893

[Ассаджи]

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
立義。摩訶僧祇大眾mahasanghika
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
Boston

http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-buddhism&month=0612&week=d&msg=E0jClP4TziYidBnLtxuQgA

[Ассаджи]

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:

90
Sattarasa bhinnavādā ekavādo abhinnako,
Sabbeva'ṭṭhārasa honti 'bhinnavādena te saha,
Nigrodhova mahārukkho theravādānamuttamo
91
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)
https://archive.org/stream/dpavasaanancien00oldegoog#page/n150/mode/2up/

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.

[Ассаджи]

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"

http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=lx&list=H-Buddhism&month=0612

[Ассаджи]

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

http://theravadaciv.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Theravada-civilizations_.pdf

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

[Ассаджи]

Сергей О. пишет:

Buddhists 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

http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=41492

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.

...

While 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"

[Ассаджи]

Но 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.


ОБ «АМЕРИКАНИЗАЦИИ» БУДДИЗМА
    Аякова Жаргал Аюшиевна
http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/ob-amerikanizatsii-buddizma

The Direction of Buddhism in America today
http://urbandharma.org/udharma5/tension2.html

[Ассаджи]

Что такое тхеравада?
Маунг Кьяук Сеинн

http://theravada.ru/Teaching/Works/what_is_theravada_maung-kyauk-seinn-gordienko.htm

[Ассаджи]

    Theravāda

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."

http://books.lakdiva.org/mahavamsa/chap003.html

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).

http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/t/theravaada.htm

[Ассаджи]

PETER  SKILLING
The Advent  of  Theravada  Buddhism to  Mainland  South-east  Asia

https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jiabs/article/viewFile/8854/2761

[Ассаджи]

Статья Питера Скиллинга "Тхеравада в истории"

http://enlight.lib.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-BJ011/bj011377404.11.pdf#page=65

Русский перевод:

Тхеравада: термин и традиция в историческом контексте

http://webshus.ru/?p=20079

[Ассаджи]

Книга под редакцией Питера Скиллинга "How Theravāda is Theravāda? Exploring Buddhist Identities"

Главы из этой книги:

Was Buddhaghosa a Theravādin? Buddhist identity in the Pali commentaries and chronicles
Rupert Gethin

https://www.academia.edu/24142416/Was_Buddhaghosa_a_Therav%C4%81din_Buddhist_identity_in_the_Pali_commentaries_and_chronicles

The Teachings of the Abhayagiri School
L. S. Cousins

https://www.academia.edu/4104205/The_Teachings_of_the_Abhayagiri_School_pp._67_127


Sthavira, Thera and Sthaviravāda in Chinese Buddhist Sources
Max Deeg

https://www.academia.edu/11700859/Sthavira_Thera_and_Sthaviravadin_in_Chinese_Buddhist_Sources

Lineage, Inheritance, and Belonging: Expressions of Monastic Affiliation from Laṅkā
Anne M. Blackburn

https://www.academia.edu/29982809/Lineage_Inheritance_and_Belonging_Expressions_of_Monastic_Affiliation_From_La%E1%B9%85k%C4%81

How Theravada is Theravada - Chapter eight: The Benefits of Ordination according to the Paramatthamangala
Claudio Cicuzza

https://www.academia.edu/3679210/How_Theravada_is_Theravada_-_Chapter_eight_The_Benefits_of_Ordination_according_to_the_Paramatthamangala

[Ассаджи]

В 8-12 веке в Индии термином "Арья-стхавира никая" называли три шри-ланкийских направления:
- Джетавания;
- Абхаягири-васин;
- Махавихара-васин,

о чем свидетельствует список Винитадевы 8 века:

http://www.safarmer.com/Indo-Eurasian/Nikaya.pdf#page=19

а также список из Варсагра-прччха-сутры 11 века:

http://www.safarmer.com/Indo-Eurasian/Nikaya.pdf#page=22

Об этом же свидетельствует цитирование Вимуттимагги как относящейся к "Арья-стхавира никае" в Санскрит-асанскрита-винишчае Дашабалашримитры, составленной в 12 веке.

Интересно, что к этому времени никакие другие школы, прежде всего - Сарвастивада и Самматия, уже не относятся в списках к "Арья-стхавира", и четко выделяются как самостоятельные школы.

Это можно объяснить тем, что сразу после расколов отколовшиеся группы некоторое время продолжали использовать завоевавшее авторитет название. А затем, получив поддержку, начинали подчеркивать свою самостоятельность и превосходство по отношению к другим группам, под новым названием.

[Ассаджи]

Буддологи, реконструируя буддизм и историю буддизма, допустили ряд ошибок, и тем самым поспособствовали возникновению ряда распространенных мифов. Один из этих мифов - существование некой "Стхавиравады", от которой будто бы "ответвилась" позднее Тхеравада.

Владимир Кириллович Шохин пишет в своей книге "Школы индийской философии: Период формирования (IV в. до н.э. — II в. н.э.)":

Хотя мы пользуемся терминами стхавиравада и тхеравада и соответственно стхавиравадины и тхеравадины практически как синонимами, мы допускаем то разграничение в их употреблении, при котором учитывается, что о тхеравадинских доктринах и текстах корректнее говорить уже в связи с «ланкийской» стадией стхавиравадинского буддизма, а о стхавиравадинских — также и в связи с историей «учения старцев», еще предшествовавшей кодификации Палийского канона. Мнение ряда буддологов, по которому тхеравада — ответвление стхавиравады — следует считать некорректным.

и с ним трудно не согласиться. Термин "Стхавиравада" - изобретение некоего буддолога начала двадцатого века, полученное санскритизацией слова "Тхеравада". Ни в одном известном санскритском тексте это слово не встречается.

Этот вопрос подробно обсуждался на конференции "H-Buddhism":

https://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=H-Buddhism&month=0612&week=c&msg=siI5i%2BC/il8JXBV1DW/HFg&user=&pw=
http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-buddhism&month=0612&week=d&msg=%2BfS4L2WmvhEPEuuaEQI9HQ&user=&pw=
http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-buddhism&month=0612&week=d&msg=TxHxLAk5yHB7CL%2BzgCUvTQ&user=&pw=
https://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=H-Buddhism&month=0612&week=d&msg=cNpOwFTGhXD7KH7xfdq3Lw&user=&pw=

[Ассаджи]

Эту легенду о Стхавираваде сейчас, судя по всему, подправляют, заменяя термин "Стхавиравада" на "Стхавира никая". Но опять получается аналогичная ошибка санскритизации. В то время, когда откололась Махасангхика, санскрита не существовало. Этот язык был создан и вошел в широкое обращение позже.

В то время продолжали общаться на языке, подобном пали, о чем свидетельствуют надписи:

http://dhamma.ru/forum/index.php?topic=561.msg13473#msg13473

Поэтому "Арья-Стхавира никая" - это позднейшее, санскритизированное название школы Старейшин, которая сейчас называется Тхеравадой.

[Ассаджи]

Джеф Шац пишет:

The Dīpavaṃsa:

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 Kathāvatthu commentary:

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.

Also, the 12th century northern Indian author Daśabalaśrīmitra refers to the Sthaviras and quotes extensively from the Vimuttimagga which he states is the "Āgama of the Ārya-Sthavira-nikāya." And the 19th century Tibetan author Jamgön Kongtrül also mentions the Sthaviras by name and, relying on Vinītadeva's Nikāyabhedopadeśasaṃgraha, also states that the "Jetavanīyas, Abhayagirikas, and Mahāvihārins are the [three] Sthaviras."

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=12929&p=210285#p210285

[Ассаджи]

Досточимый Аналайо тоже написал о термине "Тхеравада":

A Note on the Term Theravāda
Bhikkhu Analayo
Abstract

With the present article I study the trajectory of the term theravāda from its earliest occurrence in the Pāli canon to its present day usage as a designation of the form of Buddhism found in Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia. My presentation begins with the term theravāda in the Pāli discourses, followed by turning to the Pāli commentaries and chronicles. Next I examine the role of the Pāli canon in the Theravāda tradition and the conception of Theravāda as a monastic lineage, after which I discuss current usage and survey alternative terms.

https://journals.equinoxpub.com/index.php/BSR/article/view/19519

[Ассаджи]

Джеф Шац пишет:

The Dīpavaṃsa:

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 Kathāvatthu commentary:

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.

Also, the 12th century northern Indian author Daśabalaśrīmitra refers to the Sthaviras and quotes extensively from the Vimuttimagga which he states is the "Āgama of the Ārya-Sthavira-nikāya." And the 19th century Tibetan author Jamgön Kongtrül also mentions the Sthaviras by name and, relying on Vinītadeva's Nikāyabhedopadeśasaṃgraha, also states that the "Jetavanīyas, Abhayagirikas, and Mahāvihārins are the [three] Sthaviras."

http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=12929&p=210285#p210285

Руперт Гетин пишет:

The Kathāvatthu-aṭṭhakathā's use of theravāda in the context of different schools of Buddhism seems in fact to be borrowed directly from the Dīpavaṃsa; as we shall see, this usage is also taken up by the Mahāvaṃsa. It is worth noting that even where theravāda is used in the earlier sources in the context of the ancient schools of Buddhism, it is not clear that we should think of precisely theravāda as the name. It is not impossible that the compounded thera itself should be taken as the name of the school, either as the plural 'elders', or as an adjective in the sense of 'belonging to the elders' and qualifying a vāda or nikāya; thera in the expression theravāda might simply be an alternative form of theriya, a term that appears to be used unambiguously in the Mahāvaṃsa to refer to one of the parties in the first division of the Saṅgha after the second council. I make this suggestion on the basis of the way the Kathāvatthu commentary talks of the eighteen ancient schools of Buddhism as ācariya-kula or ācariya-vāda; the list includes the Mahisāsakas and Vajjiputtakas, who are then referred to as the Mahisāsaka-vāda and Vajjiputtaka-vāda, suggesting that vāda is not so much part of the name of the school as simply a term for 'school' or 'tradition', just like nikāya, which is also used here. Also of note in this context is the way in which the subcommentary to the Kathāvatthu commentary explains the Dīpavaṃsa's (V 52) syntactically rather awkward theravādānam uttamo:

Here thera is specified without any case ending; thera is in the sense of 'that of the elders'. What does it refer to? The tradition (vāda). 'That of the elders is the highest of traditions,' is what is meant.

In other words, we can understand the expression theravāda in the Dīpavaṃsa and Mahāvaṃsa as equivalent to theriya-vāda and as meaning strictly 'the tradition belonging to the elders'; Thera-vāda would simply be an alternative to Theriya-nikāya, although the latter expression seems not to be found in Pali literature. That there is some uncertainty about the use of the full expression theravāda as the proper name of a school is perhaps a minor point. Yet since the expected Sanskrit equivalent sthāviravāda seems not to be found in the ancient sources, it is a point still worth making as it suggests that the Pali sources may not be as out of line with other ancient Indian Buddhist sources in their use of terminology as might otherwise appear. For Buddhist Sanskrit sources, Edgerton cites simply Ārya-Sthāviras (paralleling Ārya-Saṃmatīyas and Ārya-Sarvāstivādas) and Ārya-Sthāvarīya-nikāya. All this suggests that strictly we should think of Pali Thera and Theriya as the proper names of a school, rather than Thera-vāda.

https://www.academia.edu/24142416/Was_Buddhaghosa_a_Therav%C4%81din_Buddhist_identity_in_the_Pali_commentaries_and_chronicles

[Ассаджи]

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 (viliüra) 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).

http://lakdiva.org/mahavamsa/chap033.html

Предыстория из Махавансы:

"THAT redaction of the true dhamma, which was arranged at the beginning by the great theras Mahäkassapa and others, is called that of the theras. One and united was the school of the theras in the first hundred years. But afterwards arose other schools of doctrine.' The heretical bhikkhus, subdued by the theras who had held the Second Council, in all ten thousand, founded the school which bears the name Mahasamghika.

From this arose the Gokulika and Ekavyoharika (schools). From the Gokulika arose the Parniatti sect and the Bahulika, from these the Cetiya sect. (Thus) there are six, with the Mahasamghika, and yet two more (groups) parted from the followers of the Thera-doctrine: the Mahimsasaka and the Vajjiputtaka bhikkhus. And there parted from them likewise the Dhammuttariya and the Bhadrayänika bhikkhus, the Chandagarika, the Sammiti and the Vajjiputtiya bhikkhus. From the Mahimsasaka bhikkhus two (groups) parted, the bhikkhus who held by the Sabbattha-school and the Dhammaguttika bhikkhus. From the Sabbattha sect arose the Kassapiya, from these arose the Samkantika bhikkhus, from these last the Sutta sect. These are twelve together with (those of) the Thera-doctrine; thereto are added the six schools named and these together are eighteen.

Thus in the second century arose seventeen schools, and other schools arose afterwards. The Hemavata and the Rajagiriya and likewise the Siddhatthaka, the first Seliya bhikkhus, the other Seliya, and the Vajiriya: these six separated (from the rest) in Jambudipa, the Dhammaruci and the Sagaliya separated (from the rest) in the island of Lanka."

http://lakdiva.org/mahavamsa/chap005.html

[Ассаджи]

What is Theravāda?

Only in two discourses, we meet the term of Theravāda. Viz, in the Ariyapariyesana and Saṃgārava Sutta of the Majjhima Nikāya. But, its commentary describes Theravāda as "theravādan'ti thirabhāvavādaṃ" (stable knowledge). Therefore, these two discourses have nothing to do with so called 'Theravāda'.

At the same time, in early Buddhism, we come across the word 'Therā' which consists somewhat relationship with the so called word of 'Theravāda'. In 'Tatiya ovāda' Sutta in Saṃyutta Nikāya, Mahākassapa there says to Buddha "now, it is very difficult to speak to the brethren. They are in a state makes it difficult to speak to them. They are intractable, they pay no deference to instruction" According to this answer of Buddha, 'Therā' means a sort of monk whose behavior is perfect in practices (Vinayānukūla). When we read this sutta more, we meet that thera are the monks who advise the newcomer to the community. And also in Udānapāḷi in Khuddaka Nikāya, we can see a sutta named 'Therā'. There is mentioned about arahant theras such as Sāriputta, Mahāmoggallāna, Mahākassapa, Mahākaccāyana, Mahākoṭṭhita, Mahākappina, Mahācunda, Mahāanuruddha. In the track of this sutta, we can think of that word of 'Thera' has been used for arahant monks or experienced monks in order of blessed one. Further, the work of Theragāthapāḷi can also be taken along with this matter. The monks whom we meet in that work, are highly appreciated in Buddhist literature for their practices in both doctrine and discipline.

Now we should have a clear intention of the word of 'Therā'. As it is mentioned in the discourses and works above, 'Therā' does mean monks who were highly appreciated, experienced and perfect in doctrine and discipline. Subsequently, their views should be Theravāda. It is fair enough to approach that kind of conclusion because first recital was held by those monks who were highly appreciated, experienced and perfect in doctrine and discipline rules. This is why the first council is named 'Theriā' in Mahāvaṃsa. In the first synod, Therās did not like to change any rule of discipline or abolish even minor rules, even though the Buddha had given permission to abolish. So then, there should be a close connection between the word of 'Therā' in early Buddhism and word of 'Theravāda'.

In Mahāvaṃsa, first recital is named as 'Theriā', because the whole recital was held by five hundred arahant monks. The account of first council leads us to think that the term 'Theravāda' did not come to exist in the time of the first council. As a matter of fact, Theravāda came to exist just after the second council, meaning the pure school of Buddhism descending from elder such as Mahākassapa.

Before the second council, the community of Sangha was only a one group. But, after the second council it was divided into two as Theravāda and Mahāsaṃghika. Those who upheld what was recited in the first two councils were Theravādins while remaining monks were Mahāsaṃghika.

In the track of the above details, Theravāda is a school, derived in the second council. 'Therā' does mean 'elders' and 'Vāda' does mean 'views'. Then Theravāda generally means 'views of elders'. Now, let us know why Theravādins assumed their name of Theravāda. It is quite explicit that Theravādins in the second council were continuing view of elders who were present in the first council. They clearly upheld what was recited in the first council and elders' views on the Buddha's doctrine. This should be why they assumed the term of Theravāda (views of elders) themselves.

Theravāda should also mean what was recited in first two councils and elders' views. According to the Vinayatīka (Sāratthadīpanītīka), all Paḷi recited in two councils are said to be Theravāda. And, views or debates of elder monks, led by Mahākassapa thera, are also said to be Theravāda. Then, there may be a question what the views or debates of those elders are. We know about the diplomacy concerning to the minor precepts (Khuddānukuddakasikkhāpadāni) applied by those elder monks, led by Mahākassapa thera in the first synod. In that way, they came to an agreements about the orthodox doctrine and discipline. These are the views and debates of elders. Do only recited doctrine-discipline and elders views or debates mean Theravāda? Not really, Theravāda by now means vast literature and tradition. Theravāda school, assuming their name, officially began in the second council with the split. It has been growing ever since. It is said that there had been eighteen schools by the time of the third council. Those various schools came to exist rendering their own views. While Theravādins protected what they preserved for a long time from the first synod, they fed the view of elders, discarding heterodox of other schools. Consequently, the content of Theravāda literature began to become vast adding more works such as works of Abhidhamma Piṭaka, Commentaries. Vinayaṭṭhakathā , Thūpavaṃsa , Vimativinodanītīkā and sāsanawaṃsa give enough evidence to prove this matter.

Nowadays, in accordance with modern scholars, those doctrine and discipline before the second council are considered to be the early Buddhism and the rest is considered as Theravāda. But this distinction comes to exist when we are talking on early Buddhism and Theravāda. But, as a whole Theravāda means what has been descending from the first synod up to the present era. Especially, Mahāvihāra monks of Ceylon and other monks in the rest Theravādin countries such as Burma, Thailand, Laos made the Theravāda literature vast by composing commentaries, sub commentaries, post canonical works, chronicles and grammar books. It is possible to be a mistrust here how the later compiled thing and early Buddhism can be considered in the same stage. The answer is given in Sumaṃgalaviḷāsinī mentioning four types of matter of Dhamma and Vinaya which refers to way of something can be taken onto stage of the whole Theravāda with the early Buddhism. It is said that elderly monks held three synods in accordance with these four matters and should not be taken anything other than these four matters.

- Sutta- suttas should not be discarded because discarding of suttas mean discarding of Buddha. If there are later compiled suttas such as suttas in Khuddhaka Nikāya, those suttas should be compared with the suttas of the early Buddhism.
- Suttānuloma- those things that are compliant with Suttas. Post canonical works can be included into this category
- Ācariyavāda- Aṭṭhakathās or commentaries should also be taken if those are compared with suttas.
- Attanomati- Attanomathi does mean logically thought notions by each.

Now it should be quite clear what the Theravāda is, how it came to exist, developed and how much it consists as a literature.

https://www.facebook.com/URV680/photos/a.478151432367190.1073741828.478087075706959/504947523020914/?type=3&theater

[Ассаджи]

The textual & historical background: Theravāda

https://www.bcbsdharma.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Introduction.pdf#page=12

[Ассаджи]

По поводу тхеравадинской Винаи Акира Хиракава пишет:

... тхеравадинская Виная не упоминает ступы, несмотря на то, что они находились в пределах границ монастырей Тхеравады в течении столетий. Очевидно, что монахи Тхеравады начали выполнять ритуалы почитания ступ уже после того, как была составлена Виная. В противоположность этому, Винаи Сарвастивадинов и Махасангхиков (T 1435 и 1425) содержат упоминание об изображениях Будды, что указывает на то, что эти две Винаи вероятно были составлены позднее, чем палийская Виная. Таким образом некоторые Винаи, составленные уже после того, как монахи начали поклоняться ступам, включают дискуссии о почитании ступ.

https://webshus.ru/11169

[Ассаджи]

Согласно тхеравадинским источникам, причиной раскола в Весали были разногласия по Винае:

https://archive.org/details/dpavasaanancien00oldegoog/page/n148

Подробно о расколе написал Ленс Казинз:

The Five Points and the Origins of the Buddhist Schools
L.S. Cousins

https://www.academia.edu/1417357/The_Five_Points_and_the_Origins_of_the_Buddhist_Schools

[Ассаджи]

Досточимый Аналайо тоже написал о термине "Тхеравада", но его статья пока что доступна только платно:

A Note on the Term Theravāda
Bhikkhu Analayo
Abstract

With the present article I study the trajectory of the term theravāda from its earliest occurrence in the Pāli canon to its present day usage as a designation of the form of Buddhism found in Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia. My presentation begins with the term theravāda in the Pāli discourses, followed by turning to the Pāli commentaries and chronicles. Next I examine the role of the Pāli canon in the Theravāda tradition and the conception of Theravāda as a monastic lineage, after which I discuss current usage and survey alternative terms.

https://journals.equinoxpub.com/index.php/BSR/article/view/19519

Доступ к этой статье уже открыт.

[Ассаджи]

Другими самоназваниями школы были "тхерия", "тхерия-вада", "тхераванса", "тхера" или "тхерика":

Из Махавансы:

3:40cd, thereh' eva katatta ca theriyayam parampara;

Now since the canon was compiled by the theras it was called the Thera tradition.

5:1, ya mahakassapadihi mahatherehi adito, kata saddhammasamgiti theriya ti pavuccati.

THAT redaction of the true dhamma, which was arranged at the beginning by the great theras Mahäkassapa and others, is called that of the theras.

http://lakdiva.org/mahavamsa/


Building the Theravāda Commentaries
Buddhaghosa and Dhammapāla as Authors, Compilers, Redactors, Editors and Critics
Oskar von Hinüber

Although Buddhaghosa is almost completely silent on himself, he is not so, luckily, on his work. In the introductory verses to his commentaries he gives an outline of his plans to explain the true meaning of the Tipiṭaka.

The overall strategy is to create a systematic survey of the orthodox  teachings  not  contradicting  the  interpretation  of  the  learned monks of the Mahāvihāra:

samayaṃ ­avilomento ­therānaṃ ­theravaṃsadīpānaṃ Mahāvihārādhivāsīnaṃ

Sv 1,21f.*, verse 9

Not contradicting the understanding of the luminaries of the lineage of Elders, those residing in the Mahāvihāra.

How does Buddhaghosa want to achieve this? Two points are of importance. He does not, in his own understanding, act out of his own personal initiative. For, as he states in the nigamanas, he was urged by various monks to compose commentaries on the four nikāyas:

The Thera Dāṭhānāga of the Sumaṅgalapariveṇa asked Buddhaghosa to write the Sumaṅgalavilāsinī on the Dīghanikāya, and this explains the title of this commentary:

āyācito­ Sumaṅgalapariveṇavāsinā­ thiragūṇena­
Dāṭhānāgena ­saṃghatherena ­theriyavaṃsena­

The  commentary  on  the Majjhimanikāya   on  the  other  hand  was  composed at a request by Buddhamitta, those on the Saṃyutta - and Aṅguttaranikāya  by Jotipāla, and the one on the Aṅguttaranikāya commentary in addition by a person named Jīvaka.

Who  were  these  monks,  and  why  did  they  ask?  The  monk  of  the highest rank is Dāṭhānāga who is a Saṃghathera, that is the seniormost of all monks within a certain area, perhaps in Ceylon or at least in Anurādhapura at the time. Although his monastery, the Sumaṅgalapariveṇa is mentioned, and although modern hand - books tend to assert that it was part of the Mahāvihāra, there is no evidence  on  its  location  whatsoever.  Perhaps  it  is  not  by  chance that a high ranking monk invited Buddhaghosa to take up his commentarial work on the very first nikāya, or āgama as Buddhaghosa prefers, and that it is emphasized only here that Dāṭhānāga as the first initiator is a member of the theriyavaṃsa.9

__________________________________________________

9 Similar  compounds  occur  very  rarely  in  late  Theravāda  texts,  e.g., theriyavādānaṃ, Mhv (Cūḷavaṃsa) XLVI. 8. The word theriya is, however, used in the Nāgārjunakoṇḍa inscription at the time of Māḍhariputta Siri Puḷumāvi (ca. 225–240): taṃbapaṃṇidīpapasādakānaṃ ­theriyānam  ( Vogel  1929–1930 [1933]: 22), cf. also Gethin 2012: 1–63, particularly pp. 5 ff.. On South Indian connections of Theravāda cf. also Skilling 2009: 61-93, particularly pp. 70 ff.

https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/jiabs/article/view/23450/17206


ON THE VIBHAJJAVĀDINS
The Mahiśāsaka, Dhammaguttaka, Kassapiya and Tambapaṇṇiya branches of the ancient Theriyas
L. S. COUSINS

In a passage which occurs in both the Visuddhimagga and in the Abhidhamma Commentary we are told that one who comments [on paṭiccasamuppāda] should do so only after joining the circle of the Vibhajjavādin(s) (Vibhajja-vādi-maṇḍalaṃ otaritvā), without rejecting the teachers, neither departing from his own samaya nor giving rise to another samaya. In the conclusion to the Visuddhimagga Buddhaghosa says that he wrote it at the request of Saṅghapāla, 'a member of the lineage of the Mahāvihāravāsins, illustrious Theriyas (i.e. followers of Theravāda), best of Vibhajja-vādins'. We shall return to this passage later. Likewise, at the conclusion of the Abhidhamma Commentary the author declares he made that commentary 'without departing from the doctrine of the teachers who are pupils of the Vibhajjavādin(s)'.

...

The inscriptional evidence

Inscriptional evidence for the use of the term Vibhajjavādin is limited but crucial. In 1955–56, during the excavation of a monastic site at Nāgārjunakoṇḍa, a stone slab was discovered near the entrance to the stūpa. The slab contained a third century CE inscription (underneath an incised pair of feet with a bodhi tree inrailing to one side), referring to ācariyanaṃ Theriyānaṃ Vibhaja-vādānaṃ Kasmira-Gaṃdhāra-Yavana-Vanavāsa-Taṃbapaṃṇi-dipa-pasādakanaṃ Mahāvihāra-vasinaṃ, i.e. 'to the Theriya teachers,23  followers of the Vibhajjavāda, bringers of faith to the Kashmir, Gandhāra, Bactrian and Vanavāsa peoples and to the island of Ceylon, dwellers in the Mahāvihāra'. It is clear that the epithets are moving from the general to the particular - first the Theravādin/*Sthaviravādin half of the Saṅgha, then the Vibhajjavādin section of the Theravādins, then mention of a particularly noteworthy feature of the Vibhajjavādins and finally the name of the particular branch of the Vibhajjavādins to which they belong.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

23 For Theriya as equivalent to Theravāda/Theravādin, see the concluding verses to Vism; Pj I 78 (cf.98); Mhv III 40; V1; and a number of times in the Cūlavaṃsa: XXXVIII 45; XLI 17; XLII 17; XLIII 30f.; XLVIII 68; LI 16; 61. And for Theriya-vāda: XLII8; XLIV8; 80; XLVI8. Also, the introduction to Vin-vn-pṭ refers to Buddhadatta as Theriya-vaṃsa-dīpa and Sv-pṭ III 372 (vl.) has: catu-mahānikāyesu theriyenā ti attho 'the meaning is: the Theriya among the four chief nikāyas'.



So far, the Pali evidence by itself suggests that the Ceylon school knew that the name 'Vibhajjavādin' referred to the tradition to which it belonged. Although by itself this is perhaps not decisive, when the epigraphic evidence from the mainland is compared with the textual passages, it is conclusive. We have already seen the inscription from Nāgārjunakoṇḍa. That inscription already demonstrates that the Mahāvihāravāsins were Theriyas and Vibhajjavādins. It can be compared directly with the conclusion to Buddhaghosa's Visuddhimagga cited above. The inscription (in a form of Middle Indian relatively close to Pali) reads:

sidhaṃ ācariyanaṃ theriyānaṃ vibhajavādānaṃ kasmiragaṃdhāra-yavanavanavāsataṃbapaṃnidipapasādakanaṃ | mahāvihāravāsinaṃ navagasathusasanaathavyajanavinichayavisaradanaṃ ariyavasa-pavenidharanaṃ | vihāre bhagavato pādasaṃghāḍa|ni|patiṭhapito savasatānaṃ hitasukhathanāya ti. |

In the later standard Pali orthography:

Siddhaṃ! Ācariyānaṃ Theriyānaṃ Vibhajja-vādānaṃ Kasmira-Gandhāra-Yavana-Vanavāsa-Taṃbapaṇṇi-dīpa-pasādakānaṃ Mahā-vihāra-vāsīnaṃ navaṅga-Satthu-sāsana-attha-vyañjana-vinicchaya-visāradānaṃariya-vaṃsa-paveṇidhārānaṃ vihāre Bhagavatopāda-saṃghāṭāni patiṭṭhapitā sabba-sattānaṃ hita-sukh'-atthanāyā ti.

"Success! Decorative slabs of the feet of the Lord have been established with a request for the welfare and happiness of all beings in the monastery of the teachers of the Theriya school, the Vibhajjavādas who were bringers of faith to Kashmir, Gandhāra, Bactria, Vanavāsa and the island of Ceylon, the Mahāvihāravāsins who are skilled in defining both the letter and the spirit of the ninefold teaching of the Master and keepers of the line [of practice] of the four ariya-vaṃsa."

Here is the conclusion to the Visuddhimagga (Vism 711f.):

Vibhajja-vādi-seṭṭhānaṃ Theriyānaṃ yasassinaṃ,
Mahāvihāra-vāsīnaṃ vaṃsa-jassa vibhāvino,
Bhadanta-Saṅghapālassa suci-sallekha-vuttino,
Vinayâcāra-yuttassa, yuttassa paṭipattiyaṃ,
khanti-soracca-mettâdi-guṇa-bhusita-cetaso,
ajjhesanaṃ gahetvāna, karontena imaṃ mayā
saddhamma-ṭṭhiti-kāmena, yo patto puñña-sañcayo
tassa tejena sabbe pi sukham edhantu pāṇino.

"After being requested [to write the Visuddhimagga] by the insightful Venerable Saṅghapāla, of pure and simple lifestyle, skilled in behaviour according to Vinaya, dedicated to practice, his mind adorned with such qualities as endurance, gentleness and loving-kindness, a member of the lineage of the Mahāvihāravāsins, illustrious Theriyas, best of Vibhajjavādins, I did this, desiring that the saddhamma should last—by the power of the heap of puñña I have obtained, may all living beings gain happiness."

I have highlighted the close similarity of phrasing in the two sources by bold-facing the parallel terms. There seems no doubt that for Buddhaghosa and for the author of this inscription in the third century CE the Mahāvihāravāsins were Vibhajjavādins. This connects directly with the evidence of the literature on the different Buddhist schools.

https://ukabs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Bsr18.22001.pdf
http://ojs3.equinoxpub.com/BSR/article/view/14449/16668

While elaborating the phrase satthakatham sabbam theravadam in the Samantapasadika, the Saratthadipani, the sub Commentary on Vinaya, clarifies that it means the Pali canon inclusive of the Commentaries that was determined in the first two Buddhist Councils . The Saratthadipani further observes that the First Buddhist Council is called Therika because it was spearheaded or gave leadership by the great elders like Mahakassapa and that the Buddhist Schools that emerged after the Second Buddhist Council, should be identified as seceded from the Theravada .

http://maytharhla.blogspot.com/2010/12/theravada-tradition-on-proof-of.html



Theriya Networks and the Circulation of the Pali Canon in South Asia: The Vibhajjavādins Reconsidered
Alexander Wynne

Abstract

This article offers further support for Lance Cousins' thesis that the Pāli canon, written down in the first century BCE in Sri Lanka, was based largely on a Theriya manuscript tradition from South India. Attention is also given to some of Cousins' related arguments, in particular, that this textual transmission occurred within a Vibhajjavādin framework; that it occurred in a form of 'proto-Pāli' close to the Standard Epigraphical Prakrit of the first century BCE; and that that distinct Sinhalese nikāyas emerged perhaps as late as the third century CE.

https://journals.equinoxpub.com/BSR/article/view/36762

[Ассаджи]

Другими самоназваниями школы были "тхерия", "тхерия-вада", "тхераванса", "тхера" или "тхерика":

...

Theriya Networks and the Circulation of the Pali Canon in South Asia: The Vibhajjavādins Reconsidered
Alexander Wynne

Abstract

This article offers further support for Lance Cousins' thesis that the Pāli canon, written down in the first century BCE in Sri Lanka, was based largely on a Theriya manuscript tradition from South India. Attention is also given to some of Cousins' related arguments, in particular, that this textual transmission occurred within a Vibhajjavādin framework; that it occurred in a form of 'proto-Pāli' close to the Standard Epigraphical Prakrit of the first century BCE; and that that distinct Sinhalese nikāyas emerged perhaps as late as the third century CE.

https://journals.equinoxpub.com/BSR/article/view/36762

Русский перевод:

География сообществ тхериев и обращение текстов Палийского канона в Южной Азии в свете переосмысления роли вибхадджавадинов

https://webshus.ru/23864

[Ассаджи]

Питер Скиллинг

Распространение буддизма тхеравады на материковой части Юго-Восточной Азии

https://webshus.ru/23851