[Q&A] Could someone teach the Dhamma better then the Buddha?

[Dhammañāṇa]

Is it possible and good to know and/or talk about other/more details about the way out of suffering than the Buddha did?

Is it possible and good to know and/or talk about other/more details about the way out of suffering than the Buddha did?

(One of the reasons for asking this question is that I thought that maybe some people needed some extra/other knowledge/insight in order for the Noble Eightfold Path to become more accessible to them.)

Not necessarily to be "better" in knowledge and understanding than the Buddha overall, but to have a better understanding or additional explicit knowledge of some things or see certain things in more detail or accuracy with regards to certain aspects about the way out of suffering, and that may also address particular, "extreme" types of ignorance, mental illness, psychosis.

To be able to answer other questions related to the way out of suffering that the Buddha was never asked.

Venerable members of the Sangha,
walking in front Fellows in leading the holly life.

     

Venerable fellows,

In Respect of the Triple Gems, Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, in Respect of the Elders of the community  , my person to share a question and investigate it. Please, may all knowledgeable Venerables and Dhammika, out of compassion, correct my person, if something is not correct and fill also graps, if something is missing.

Valued Upasaka, Upasika, Aramika(inis),
dear Readers and Visitors,

Householder (my person "guesses" Upasaka already) Angus, Interested,

 


- Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa -

To answer in short: Yes, it is possible for the individuals situation, that someone else then the Buddha offers the Dhamma in "better" ways that the Buddha could, yet it's nevertheless the Buddha that one would have met.

While surely there is no teacher more advanced then the Buddha himself right view is gained on two things, hearing the good teaching, and yoniso manasikara (proper attention to what gives birth).

When one of it is not present, it would not work that it would arise. While it requires the Dhamma of the Noble Ones, Arahats, best formulated by the Buddha, it does not necessary require to be spoken by a Buddha, meaning that even a worldling could transmit it, if remembering it, heard before.

It also does not require to be 1:1 a repetition of what the Buddha said, since, as he told, "what ever good told, is the word of the Tathagata.

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

    “But is this Ven. Uttara's own extemporaneous invention, or is it the saying of the Blessed One, the Worthy One, the Rightly Self-awakened One?”

    “Very well, then, deva-king, I will give you an analogy, for there are cases where it's through an analogy that observant people can understand the meaning of what is being said. Suppose that not far from a village or town there was a great pile of grain, from which a great crowd of people were carrying away grain on their bodies, on their heads, in their laps, or in their cupped hands. If someone were to approach that great crowd of people and ask them, 'From where are you carrying away grain?' answering in what way would that great crowd of people answer so as to be answering rightly?”

    “Venerable sir, they would answer, 'We are carrying it from that great pile of grain,' so as to be answering rightly.”

    “In the same way, deva-king, whatever is well said is all a saying of the Blessed One, the Worthy One, the Rightly Self-awakened One. Adopting it again & again from there do we & others speak.”

Quote from: Uttara Sutta

In that sense, "is the teaching of a Buddha required?", if categorical answered, one needs to say "yes and no". While it might be said by one not at the stage of Buddhahood, it still would be the word of Buddha (awakened one).

Now in relation of proper attention. To be able to listen to someone requires certain Upanissaya (strong conditions). It might be, that out of inclination toward certain kind of people, one would be not able to listen to the Buddha himself, the kind of speech, not used to it, and so not lower ones position to be able to receive it and maintain proper attention. Even at the Buddhas time there have been many arising to path and fruits by listening to the Sanghas member, someone near and dear, in words used to.

So also in relation of ones own giving into, while hearing the Dhamma, it could be that another then the Buddha is the one able to offer so that one can receive.

People have certain Nissaya with each other, remember the many cases where the Buddha invested much effort to convince leaders of sects. The members would never have been able to escape from there certain relation. One they heard the Dhamma or approve from those thwy are bound to, they could and many ordained on the account of following their leader.

The same works today as well. As long leaders of bond groups are not turning toward the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, their folk would not pay much attention. That's for example one reason why there is still no Sangha in the West and dies of even in the most old countries since leaded by democracy, the opinion of the many folk, which has naturally less access to the Gems.

This being the reason, Upanissayapaccaya (strong condition causes), incl. people and food, here to mention, people need to meet the right group, the right teacher for them. Being the case, it's again not so that someone else then the Buddha speaks, althought another might utter, since who ever sees/hears the Dhamma, sees/hears the Tathagata.

And that is why one owes much to them, as actually living Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha next to them, once they could receive their gift.

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

    Has done much

        "Bhikkhus, these three persons have done much to a person. Which three? Bhikkhus, the person gone to whom this person takes refuge in the Enlightenment, in the Teaching and the Community of bhikkhus.

    "Bhikkhus, the person gone to whom this person knows as it really is, this is unpleasant, this is the arising of unpleasantness, this is the cessation of unpleasantness and this is the path leading to the cessation of unpleasantness.

    "Again, bhikkhus, the person gone to whom, this person destroys desires, releases the mind and released through wisdom, here and now abides having realized. Bhikkhus, these three persons have done much to this person.

    "Bhikkhus, it is not possible that these three persons could be thoroughly repaid with gratitude, by this person revering him, attending on him, clasping hands towards him and honouring him with robes, morsel food, dwellings and medicinal requisites."

Quote from: http://forum.sangham.net/index.php/page,s0402m2.mul2_en_uppa.html#an03.24

This is how people, even today, gain rightly their living Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha.

This here taught is the reason why may do not good, really not good, when approached by commentaries, later uttering, even taught here, when not just cited, and neglect them categorically, neglect the Elders and those with directer relation as well as their advice.

Nevertheless it's important to remark that there, on account what the Buddha specifically had taught, are two people who sander the Tathagata: "One who explains something further which does not require further explaining and one who does not explains something further, what requires further explaining." So even one who simply just recite the Buddhas words, could, on certain occasions, in certain situations, or in and of itself, slander the Tathagata with it. And also the other way around.

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

"Monks, these two slander the Tathagata. Which two? He who explains a discourse whose meaning needs to be inferred as one whose meaning has already been fully drawn out. And he who explains a discourse whose meaning has already been fully drawn out as one whose meaning needs to be inferred. These are two who slander the Tathagata."

Quote from: http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.025.than_en.html

However, in relation of the message here given: "Today" there are many who like to neglect this fact, thinking they do not owe anybody something, where defilement argue it was by the Tripple Gems, not any particular person... that is not only an indicator that they haven't arrived at the path, a sign of ingratitude, but also of a lot of demerits, holding wrong views, possible even cut off in their self-over-estimation, having made themselves to islands, islands which are drifting out into the open sea and bound to sink for away form borderlands to the Noble Domain.

Anumodana punna kusala!