First of all, we must go back and recall the original
principles of the Dhammadana Group. Our objective has been to
resurrect and support Dhamma practice for those who already have
studied the pariyatti-dhamma (Dhamma to be studied)
sufficiently, such as those who have passed their Dhamma
examinations and some Pali levels. Consequently, we have set up a
place as convenient as possible for those who wish and intend to
practice. This place goes by the name "Suan
Mokkhabalarama" (The Garden of the Power of
Liberation). It has been active since May of 2475 B.E. (1932 CE).
According to these principles, all who stay in this place must
use their own studies and knowledge as the standards for their
practice. There is no person who is set up as the
"Teacher" or "Leader." Everybody is just a
good friend, or "kalyanamitta," ready to help
each other when problems arise. These principles have been
announced in the Dhammadana Group's "Buddha-Sasana
Quarterly" since 2476 and have remained in affect
without any changes through to the present.
That we hold to this principle of having no individual as
Teacher is on account of three reasons:
- We are not yet able to find any person who ought to be
called "Teacher" in an era, such as this, when
Dhamma practice is in decline and turmoil.
- Even if we could find such a person, nonetheless, we see
the danger of practitioners sticking and attaching to the
person who is their teacher to the point that the mind
isn't fit for the stage of practice that quenches dukkha
on the highest level.
- The Buddha said, "The Dhamma and Vinaya that the
Tathagata has shown and laid down will exist as the guru
or teacher for you all when the Tathagata has passed
on."
These are times when circles of religious practice are in
turmoil due to the deterioration of Dhamma practice. This has
gone on for so long that different centers are quarreling and
competing over ways of practice and so are generally practicing
in foolish ways. Those who originated the activities of the
Dhammadana Group, and of Suan Mokkhabalarama, consequently feel
that we ought to hold to the Dhamma and Vinaya (Discipline) which
the Buddha demonstrated -- as far as appears in the Tipitika,
using the Mahapadesa Standard for the Suttanta1
to identify them -- as our standard of practice or as the
teacher, rather than clinging to a certain person or the methods
of a certain center as our standard, because they're all confused
and disordered these days. Due to the above mentioned three
causes, this center has laid down the standard that no individual
is considered to be the teacher. In addition to the Dhamma and
Vinaya principles which each person has studied sufficiently,
each of us can act as kalyanamitta for each other in our
continuing practice, without any individual being set up as the
Center's Teacher.2 This still holds
true at the present.
For the reasons mentioned above, principles of practice to be
used in this center have been gathered directly from the original
Pali sources and commentaries. Each person may choose directly as
best suits him. Or, anyone may choose from what those responsible
for the center's texts department will gather together for them
to choose from. Thus, our line of practice can't be called the
Burmese way, the Sri Lankan way, or the Thai way; the way of this
monastery, that monastery, or whatever monastery; the way of this
teacher or that teacher. One can only say that we practice in the
way which each of us personally chooses from the Pali texts
taught by the Buddha himself. Further, the commentaries and
special texts such as the Visuddhimagga will not be followed
where a passage conflicts with the original Pali texts.
Because I (the speaker) have been in a position to observe the
circumstances and developments of this center from the start up
to the present, that is, for more than twenty-five years; as well
as being responsible for the center's texts department, which has
put me in a position of constantly being asked about various
matters concerning standards and Dhamma principles for practice;
I'm consequently in a position to know well what lines of
practice have been followed at this center. This makes it
possible to gather them into an outline that conveniently answers
the inquiries of visitors, especially newly arrived
"Sahadhammika Friends," who naturally must ask about
these matters. This will also serve as a central standard for all
practitioners, in order to be an asset from the beginning of
their practice onward.
[from Evolution/Liberation
#4]
1. The Mahapadesa (Great
Authorities) for the Suttanta are one of the primary sets of
principles for determining what it and is not the Buddha's
teaching. The Buddha observed that various persons will claim
that certain ideas and teachings are his, based on various
authorities, such as, 1) having heard it from the Lord Buddha
Himself, 2) having heard from a Sangha with an elder monk as
leader, 3) having heard it from a group of elder monks learned
and expert in Dhamma & Vinaya, or 4) having heard it from a
particular learned monk expert in Dhamma & Vinaya.
The Buddha advised that no matter what authority is claimed, "the
words of that monk (or speaker) are neither to be welcomed or
scorned, their letter and spirit is to be well studied, laid
beside the Suttas and compared with the Vinaya."
The Suttas (lit. "thread") are the recorded discourses
of the Buddha and some leading disciples; here the unifying
thread that runs throughout them is emphasized. The Vinaya is the
monastic discipline gradually laid down by the Buddha for his
monks and nuns. (Note that the "Abhidhamma"
did not yet exist.)
"If, when laid beside the Suttas and compared with
the Vinaya, the letter and spirit of these words does not lie
well with the Suttas and does not agree with the Vinaya, then you
may come to the conclusion: Surely this is not the word of the
Blessed One and it has been wrongly grasped by that monk. Then
you may reject it (as my teaching)."
"If, when laid beside the Suttas and compared with the
Vinaya, the letter and spirit of these words lie well with the
Suttas and agree with the Vinaya, then you may come to the
conclusion: Surely this is the word of the Blessed One and it has
been correctly received by that monk. Then you may accept it (as
my teaching)." (D.ii.123; A.ii.167)