Posts Tagged ‘Richard Gombrich’

Do We Need Pāli?

Pāli is the language of many of the oldest Buddhist discourses. Do we need to know Pāli to know about or practice early Buddhism? We’ll consider that question with reference to a new book out by eminent Pāli scholar Richard Gombrich, as well as a look at a couple of early texts from the Buddha…

Read More

Is Early Buddhism in Danger?

Academic study of early Buddhism has waned to near nothing, if a recent editorial by eminent scholar Richard Gombrich is anything to go on. In today’s video I’ll discuss why this should concern us.  

Read More

Early Buddhism and Secular Buddhism

Folks interested in a secular approach to Buddhism will find many forms of Buddhism congenial. Why is early Buddhism particularly so? We will look at the Kevaddha Sutta (DN 11) and some material from Richard Gombrich, eminent scholar of early Buddhism, to help illuminate the discussion.

Read More

Good Books on Early Buddhism

Here are the books mentioned in the video: Bhikkhu Bodhi: In the Buddha’s Words Rupert Gethin: The Foundations of Buddhism Williams, Tribe, Wynne: Buddhist Thought Walpola Rahula: What the Buddha Taught Richard Gombrich: What the Buddha Thought Richard Gombrich: Theravāda Buddhism, 2nd Ed. Johannes Bronkhorst: Buddhist Teaching in India Anālayo: Satipaṭṭhāna, the Direct Path to…

Read More

Food and Fire in Dependent Origination

You wouldn’t know from the title of the sutta — “The Greater Discourse on the Destruction of Craving” — that this is one of the suttas that gives the most detail on dependent arising (aka dependent origination, interdependent co-arising, etc) but it is one in which the Buddha attempts to put across the concept that was the backbone of all his teachings. He describes it backwards (which is normal) and forwards (used almost as frequently). He covers arising, and he covers cessation (backwards and forwards). And then he describes it in terms of fire, in terms of nutriment, and in terms of one person’s life, as well as pointing out what we should and shouldn’t care about if we properly understand it (we would not, for example, have any reason to be wondering who we were in the past or who we will be in the future).(1)

Read More