Ниродха - не уничтожение

Рената, а в этом смысле - с позиции священной модели (культ-адепт-канон) - какая разница - какую систему отправлять? в чём отличие буддизма, от, скажем, нагвализма, или дискордианства?

[THE TWO KINDS OF CONCENTRATION]
32.Now, concentration is of two kinds, that is to say, access concentration and absorption concentration: the mind becomes concentrated in two ways, that is, on the plane of access and on the plane of obtainment. Herein, the mind becomes concentrated on the plane of access by the abandonment of the hindrances, and on the plane of obtainment by the manifestation of the jhāna factors.
33.The difference between the two kinds of concentration is this. The factors are not strong in access. It is because they are not strong that when access has arisen, the mind now makes the sign its object and now re-enters the life-continuum,13 just as when a young child is lifted up and stood on its feet, it repeatedly falls down on the ground. But the factors are strong in absorption. It is because they are strong that when absorption concentration has arisen, the mind, having once interrupted the flow of the life-continuum, carries on with a stream of profitable impulsion for a whole night and for a whole day, just as a healthy man, after rising from his seat, could stand for a whole day.

13. Bhavaṅga (life-continuum, lit. “constituent of becoming”) and javana (impulsion) are first mentioned in this work at I.57 (see n. 16); this is the second mention. The “cognitive series” (citta-vīthi)  so extensively used here is unknown as such in the Piṭakas. Perhaps the seed from which it sprang may exist in, say, such passages as: “Due to eye and to visible data eye-consciousness arises. The coincidence of the three is contact. With contact as condition there is feeling. What he feels he perceives. What he perceives he thinks about4. What he thinks about he diversifies [by means of craving, pride and false view] … Due to mind and to mental data …” (M I 111). And: “Is the eye permanent or impermanent … Are visible objects permanent or impermanent? … Is the mind permanent or impermanent? Are mental data … Is mind-consciousness … Is mind-contact … Is any feeling, any perception, any formation, any consciousness, that arises with mind-contact as condition permanent or impermanent?” (M III 279). And: “These five faculties [of eye, etc.] each with its separate objective field and no one of them experiencing as its objective field the province of any other, have mind as their refuge, and mind experiences their provinces as its objective field” (M I 295). This treatment of consciousness implies, as it were, more than even a “double thickness” of consciousness. An already-formed nucleus of the cognitive series, based on such Sutta Piṭakas material, appears in the Abhidhamma Piṭakas. The following two quotations show how the commentary (bracketed italics) expands the Abhidhamma Piṭakas treatment.

(i) “Herein, what is eye-consciousness element? Due to eye and to visible data (as support condition, and to functional mind element (= 5-door adverting),  as disappearance condition, and to the remaining three immaterial aggregates as conascence condition) there arises consciousness … which is eye-consciousness element. [Similarly with the other four sense elements.] Herein, what is mind element? Eye-consciousness having arisen repeatedly falls down on the ground. But the factors are strong in absorption. It is because they are strong that when absorption concentration has arisen, the mind, having once interrupted the flow of the life-continuum, carries on with a stream of profitable impulsion for a whole night and for a whole day, just as a healthy man, after rising from his seat, could stand for a whole day.

Рената отчасти права. Со стороны бхаванга действительно выглядит как искусственная умозрительная конструкция, введенная в учения с целью хоть как то объяснить непрерывность потока сознания и действие кармы, особенно в контексте перерождения. Но без этого действительно у "коровы" только три ноги.

Рената отчасти права. Со стороны бхаванга действительно выглядит как искусственная умозрительная конструкция

Отказываемся от реальности прошлого и будущего, признаём реальным только настоящее.

Буддхагоса - это основатель тхеравады, или, скажем так, фиксатор воззрения. Тот, кто считает по основным вопросам иначе, чем Буддхагоса - не тхеравадин.

Как написал ТМ - "ниточка", без неё трудно представить, но это-то и интересно.

Глава 4 Висуддхимагги:

Декларирование всеобщей причинности обязывает иметь какой то механизм ее реализации.

Так и будем считать, что основатель тхеравады - уважаемый ученый, монах, который даже арахантом не был.