Yoshizen's Blog

Contradiction in Agama (Nikaya) Sutra

The scripture called Agama (Known as Nikaya in the Theravada sect) is the oldest

group of the Buddhist’s scripture written down from the recited oral heritage

kept mouth to mouth for 200 years.   Since they came from the memories of the

original followers, we should expect that they are the closest to the

Lord Buddha’s real words though —– were they ?


—– Use your common sense and good imagination.

Think about the text, kept purely in the memories, taught mouth to mouth for 200 years

where in the society, everybody else was believing and talking completely different idea.

Lord Buddha was the only one, teaching the impermanence of the soul = or denying the

permanence of the Self (Atoman).  —– Against this, all others were believing the

perpetual soul (Atoman) and believing reincarnation, hence the man is suffering in the

endless cycle of Birth and the Death (of which the Hindu people call Samsara.)

This idea gradually seeped into the original words.


And the time when the oral heritage was written down, the people who took the task 

were the Vedic Brahman. Because, they were the only people who knows write and read, 

and has learned the Veda.   Of course, the Veda teaches the perpetual soul, Atoman and 

its reincarnation.   Therefore for those Brahman, the teachings of No-Self, Anatoman is

nothing but an absurd idea.   Naturally, when they wrote down the recited texts of the

teachings, they couldn’t understand the alien idea, so that they changed it to the words

which made more sense for them.  And to show off their writing skill, they decorated the

text with a lots of glorious addition, such as the name of deities and kings etc not

mention the new fancy stories.

—– As a result, the Scripture Agama or Nikaya ended-up to be a mix-up with Hinduism.


Amazingly, this mess is still continuing today and you can easily see the situation.

The translated script of Agama (Nikaya) is available in the Net, though as you may expect,

they are quite hefty amount.    Such as the one, “here is the link”.

And “this one is an extract” with good commentary and the explanation of the historical

background.   The author of this extract, Dr. Thomas Tam seemed to be a quite profound

scholar of Buddhists scripture though, he was showing the deep spell of the Vedic idea.

So, he was writing “The following passage does not appear to carry any religious message.

It is just a vignette of a moment of the Buddha’s life.

“It was a dark night, raining lightly, with flashes of lightning. The Buddha said to Ananda:

“You can come out with the umbrella over the lamp.” Ananda listened, and walked behind

the Buddha, with an umbrella over the lamp. When they reached a place,

the Buddha smiled.   Ananda said: “The Buddha doesn’t smile without a reason.

What brings the smile today?” The Buddha said: “That’s right!  That’s right!

The Buddha doesn’t smile without a reason. Now you are following me with an umbrella

over a lamp.   I look around, and see everyone doing the same thing.”” [S-1150] “

This was the passage I’ve quoted in the “Test of Selflessness” (though, Since I’ve read it

many years ago, wording of my memory was not exact) — As I said in the post, this was how

Lord Buddha demonstrated what “Selflessness should be”, but Dr.Tam thought it has

religiously no significant. = This is the very situation how “So called” scholar is

understanding  the Buddhism. —– If this passage was seen “No Significant”  how PhD

could talk about the selflessness or the Void in Buddhism. 


There was the another passage the author was saying that “This was the evidence that

Lord Buddha had the concept of reincarnation”

“Did the Buddha talk about reincarnation? In the Diverse Agama Sutra, there are

several passages that the Buddha had referred to it. The following is an example.

The Buddha told the monks: “Let’s say the whole earth becomes a big ocean.

A piece of wood with a hole floats on it, drifting with the waves, and being blown by

winds from all directions.   There is a blind turtle that sticks out its head once every

 hundred years. Will it meet this hole?”

Ananda said: “Not possible, if the blind turtle is in the ocean’s east, the driftwood 

may be in the west, south, north, all directions.   They may not meet.”

The Buddha told Ananda: “Hard as it may for the blind turtle to meet the driftwood,

it may still be possible.  For an ignorant person to regain his human form, however, it

is much more unlikely to happen.   Why? It is because these people don’t follow the

principles of the dharma.   They don’t do good deeds. They kill repeatedly, with the

strong ones bullying the weak, and sinned without end.   That’s why for those who do

not understand the four noble truths, they better start to learn and practice them

diligently…” [S-328]

—– Can you read this in such context ?  

The words “regain human form” did mean reincarnation ?

(wasn’t that meant just “regain sanity to be a human” ? )

Do you agree with his wishful thinking ?


Lord Buddha brought the aspect of the Karma into the Dharma.

By definition of its word, Dharma should be the one which keeps its own attribute

= keeps mean never change.   Though, Karma affects.   And it is the dynamic driving

force.   Therefore the karma in the Dharma mean, it is the constantly changing huge

mechanism hence, there is no permanence. = Non can stay permanent as the 

existence of everything is relying on the others.   And as a soul is dependent to its body,

 no permanent body mean no permanent soul (Self, Atoman).

 And this is the very basis of the teachings of No-Self.   No-Self = No-atoman (Anatman)

mean no remaining soul after death = no possibility of reincarnation.

= No past life which will “Cast” next life could exists = Therefore, there was no “Cast” in

the Lord Buddha’s follower’s sangha. This was why his teachings were so revolutionary.

Though, this idea couldn’t be accepted in the Vedic, Hindu society.

So, they changed the story and started to call

Lord Buddha as one of their Guru.   What a contempt.


Though this tendency is still active today

= insatiable appetite to find an evidence among the scripture, the

Lord Buddha’s words mentioning “Reincarnation”.

Obviously, it is nothing but absurd that if the teachings of the “Impermanence and

the Selflessness” containing “Perpetual Soul reincarnates to the Next Life, hence

having the suffering from the endless cycle of Birth and the Death (Samsara)”.

As a matter of fact, we can see lords of such words in the Agama / Nikaya though

as I aforesaid, they were nothing but the mix-up or expression for a convenience and

Lord Buddha’s stance was still the same “There was absolutely no answer to the

silly question, what would happen after a death”.

This NO answer was not just a rack of word but the strongest denial with despise.

—– You might got your eyes clear.

Now look around and check so-called books about the Buddhism.

How many this kind of absurdities you can find ?



Fantasy of Mahayana Buddhism

There was a reason how the fantasy of Mahayana Buddhism was invented.   

It was because the most of the people include the monks couldn’t get Selfless 

state ( hence not able to eliminate the cause of the trouble), therefore needed to

have an excuse = which was that having the sufferings is the enlightenment too.

(You have to accept the sufferings, and believe that you are still a happy person ! 

= if not happy, you are not believing strong enough.)  😀


Lord Buddha’s teachings was, that the deluded idea of Self is the root cause of

all the sufferings.  So that, if the Self which creates delusion was not there in

the first place, sufferings wouldn’t be there neither.

When Kisa Gotami’s “SELF” which had been grieving the loss of her child has

evaporated through the “running practice” the suffering was disappeared,

even though the fact of the death was still there.

When the “SELF” which was filled with doubt and perplexity of Churi Pantac

(Shuri Bantoku) was eliminated through 10 years work, sweeping the garden,

there no longer be any doubt or hindrance in his life, hence it was

his Enlightenment.

= Essentially, to eliminate the subject, the “SELF” which suffers with sufferings,

the sufferings would no longer be existed.   But not everybody can achieve this.

So that, the Mahayana invented an easy solution to change the story

 “to have sufferings is also the Enlightenment” =

this is a religion, based on the belief and the blah blah not the concrete truth.


Instead to do the actual mental training (desensitize the perception),

it was substituted by the fancy belief.  = Glorious stories were invented and

the Mantra with magic power (said to have :-D) was imported from Tantrism.

Many new Buddha styled god were invented not mention a lords of divine

figures from Hinduism. It was a clear departure from a fact based teachings of

Lord Buddha to a fantasy based mythical religion.

In metaphor, the teachings to swim across the river was substituted by the

fantastic stories and the pictures of Heaven on the other side of the river, with

a sales caption “Just come on board, this big ship will take you there”.

While abandon the practice to save oneself, instead, to sell the ticket of the ship,

using the same Buddha’s name is a fraud.

What a history.



%d bloggers like this: