DarwidHalim wrote:I have heard about this term 84000 teachings both in Mahayana and Theravada teachings?
What does it mean?
How do they calculate this number?
Is it like 1. Anapasatti Sutta 2. Prajna paramitha Sutta, 3. Xxxx, etc. ?
How many of them in Pali and how many of them in Sankrit? Other language?
Or 84000 teachings are just symbolic meaning? In this case why the number is 84000?
Namdrol wrote:DarwidHalim wrote:They are calculated from 21,000 afflictions ofdesire, 21,000 afflictions of hatred, 21,000 afflictions of ignorance and 21,000 combined afflictions = 84,000. Thus, there is a dharma teaching for each affliction.
DarwidHalim wrote:Namdrol wrote:DarwidHalim wrote:They are calculated from 21,000 afflictions ofdesire, 21,000 afflictions of hatred, 21,000 afflictions of ignorance and 21,000 combined afflictions = 84,000. Thus, there is a dharma teaching for each affliction.
Ok. What are the title of each those teachings for ignorance for example?
They are 21000. That is a lot. What is the name for each 21000 items?
DarwidHalim wrote:Then what is the actual meaning of this 21000?
21000 techniques to handle ignorance?
21000 types of ignorance?
21000 way we get ignorance?
DarwidHalim wrote:I think Ananda must have meaning buy saying 82000 from Buddha.
Another 2000 he received it from his colleagues.
In Vajrayana context For example, the scholars say tantric teachings are inside this 84000 teachings.
But Theravada said there is no such thing. Buddha doesn't teach tantra.
So, if they claimed so, they themselves must have the complete 84000 teachings all must be in Pali.
If in Pali, they only have 5000 it means many teachings are missing.
This is a source of gray area and dispute.
I dont think Ananda will say 84000 as many many teachings. He can use as many Gangga sands or other fancy term.
DarwidHalim wrote:If Ananda said I have received 84000 teeachings or Dhamma or dhammakhandas or whatever, I think it is ok to think it means a lot lot lot of stuff.
But what he said is he received 82000 + 2000, where 2000 are from his colleagues.
The way he say this things suggest or imply a specific amount, not just metaphor.
Users browsing this forum: Inge and 17 guests