What do you think?
Rate this book
Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions: A Historical Perspective
Renowned scholar-monk writes accessibly on some of the most contentious topics in Buddhism—guaranteed to ruffle some feathers.
Armed with his rigorous examination of the canonical records, respected scholar-monk Bhikkhu Analayo explores—and sharply criticizes—four examples of what he terms “superiority conceit” in Buddhism:
Ven. Analayo challenges the scriptural basis for these conceits and points out that adhering to such notions of superiority is not, after all, conducive to practice. “It is by diminishing ego, letting go of arrogance, and abandoning conceit that one becomes a better Buddhist,” he reminds us, “no matter what tradition one may follow.”
Thoroughly researched, Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions provides an accessible approach to these conceits as academic subjects. Readers will find it not only challenges their own intellectual understandings but also improves their personal practice.
Armed with his rigorous examination of the canonical records, respected scholar-monk Bhikkhu Analayo explores—and sharply criticizes—four examples of what he terms “superiority conceit” in Buddhism:
Ven. Analayo challenges the scriptural basis for these conceits and points out that adhering to such notions of superiority is not, after all, conducive to practice. “It is by diminishing ego, letting go of arrogance, and abandoning conceit that one becomes a better Buddhist,” he reminds us, “no matter what tradition one may follow.”
Thoroughly researched, Superiority Conceit in Buddhist Traditions provides an accessible approach to these conceits as academic subjects. Readers will find it not only challenges their own intellectual understandings but also improves their personal practice.
- GenresBuddhism
184 pages, Hardcover
Published February 9, 2021
21 people are currently reading
62 people want to read
About the author
Anālayo
35 books112 followersVen. Anālayo, born in 1962, was ordained a Buddhist monk in Sri Lanka in 1995, completing his Ph.D. on satipaṭṭhāna at the University of Peradeniya in 2000. He is a contributor to the Encyclopaedia of Buddhism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
March 5, 2024
Bhikkhu Analayo is a German scholar monk of the Theravada tradition and was mentored by Bhikkhu Bodhi. His doctoral thesis was on the Sattipatthana Sutta from the respected University of Peradeniya University in Sri Lanka. He is able to read classical Chinese and has done comparative studies on the early Buddhist texts in Chinese, Pali and Sanskrit.
The thrust of this book is to point out the superiority conceit in major Buddhist traditions, their historical development, and why recognising these as conceit is important because they are not aligned with Buddha’s teachings of seeing the truth. The aim is to promote mutual respect and collaboration because each tradition has its value and contribution to Buddhism.
In this book, Bhikkhu Analayo discusses the superiority conceit in 4 areas:
1) Androcentricism – especially in the Theravada tradition which refuses ordination of women based on a technicality that the bhikkhuni (nun) order is extinct and it was indispensable to ordain nuns in collaboration with bhikkhus (monks).
2) Mahayana Tradition – which looks at Theravada tradition as a lesser, inferior vehicle for enlightenment and sees their own Bodhisattva ideal as superior.
3) Theravada Tradition – which thinks that they are the oldest school and have preserved the Buddhist scriptures and practises unchanged from Buddha’s time, and hence superior to other traditions.
4) Secular Buddhism – which has adopted a western, materialist and iconoclastic lens in viewing Buddhism; has distorted and undermined the core doctrine of Buddhism, and considers many of its core doctrine as superstition.
One of my family member is a Mahayana Buddhist. This was his first contact with Buddhism and he has stayed with this tradition, especially since he is fluent in Chinese. Whenever he attends other Buddhist events or hear Buddhist teachings from early Buddhist texts or from monks who happen to be from the Theravada tradition, he will inevitably say: “According to Mahayana......Mahayana say this, that….” basically to refute or undermine what was taught and as if the Mahayana teachings he had received was superior.
Or he would keep harping Theravada tradition as being 小成法, that is, the Lesser Vehicle (or Hinayana) which is a derogatory term used by those from the Mahayana tradition which they consider a superior later "revelation" by Buddha. He sees Mahayana as the Greater Vehicle which is more compassionate because they embody the Bodhisattva ideal, that this, whose who are on the way to enlightenment postponing their own Buddha-hood until all sentient beings are saved. And he kept saying that those who pursue the Bodhisattva path are superior to arahants.
I always find this attitude strange and annoying.* And this Mahayana attitude is one of those that Bhikkhu Analayo pointed out as a superiority conceit. I feel so vindicated.
It is interesting that Bhikku Analayo pointed out that both the arahant and bodhisattva path were different vocations practised among early monastics, even side by side within the same school – and that non was considered superior than than the other. It was a personal choice. The ideal of the bodhisattva and its eventual primacy within the Mahayana tradition was a later development, which coincided with the gradual reverence of the Buddha as an omniscient being which was never implied in the EBTs. (No wonder it is seen as "revelation" by the Buddha himself - like almost a divine revelation.)
It just baffles me that Buddha did not postpone his own enlightenment, and neither did his famous disciples who became arahants. So where did this “superior” bodhisattva ideal and path come from? It is a later development. In the EBTs, it was very clear that Buddha was searching for liberation for himself, and not to save the world or all sentient beings. It was only after he was enlightened, he was debating with himself if he should teach because the teachings are not easily understood by the ordinary person because we are so engrossed and trapped in our mundane lives, way of seeing the world through our self and way of reacting to the world through craving.
The Theravada tradition had also innovated over time, and some of the later developments included gradually emphasising body and breath in meditation, and eventually on breath alone – and de-emphasising joy and the other divide abodes. I fine this very interesting because joy is a very important motivator, especially spiritual joy. It helps us along our path and our meditation, although we are not to be attached to it. Also, the notion of fear as being indispensable part of progress in meditation was introduced later, and was not in the EBTs. Wonderful and encouraging!
Modern metta meditation is person-centric, asking us to focus on metta of loving kindness on ourselves first, then on those we love, then neutral persons and lastly on those we dislike. But this was a later innovation, because in the EBTs, the reaching was to meditate on the divine abodes (loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity) in all directions to practise their boundless nature. Interesting!
There are lots of other gems too eg how the Theravada tradition see Pali as the original language spoken by the Buddha (scholars know it is not, but that Pali was a language close to what Buddha would have used). Pali is like a magic language to this tradition which is very conservative. And when there is uncertainty in pronouncing certain terms, during important events such as ordination of monks, they even recite a verse twice to make sure that at least one of the pronunciations is the right one so that the ordination is legitimate eg “Buddham” vs “Buddhang”. But this is contrary to Buddha’s point that language the Dhamma should be taught in the learner’s language, and that language in itself is limiting.
It is not an easy read because Bhikku Analayo really knows his stuff and gives a lot of historical evidences, some of which I am not familiar with. This book is supposed to be a simpler version of a fuller one, and was written for the general public. Even so, I did struggle sometimes but it is still a worthy read.
*It is not because I think Theravada is the best. I do not adhere to any single tradition but my earliest exposure to Buddhism was with western Theravada monks who happen to place importance to studying and examining the Early Buddhist Texts (EBTs) – which is contained in the Pali Canon that happens to belong to the Theravada school.
The Pali Canon is the oldest and most complete/intact set of Buddhist literature available to date from all the ancient Buddhists schools which have become extinct. It is important to point out that the Pali Canon is not equivalent to EBTs – but the EBTs are found within the Pali Canon. Comparisons of the EBTs, namely the Nikayas, show exact replicas in the Agamas which is the oldest core of literature of the Mahayana tradition – almost word for word. So these similarities mean they can be traced to a common source.
I believe that we must look at the texts that are closest to Buddha’s time, and understand what was taught in the EBTs and practised in early Buddhism vs what are later developments and innovation. It does not mean that all later innovations are of no value or are untrue but we must go back to the earliest source first, and this is the way we can see what were the changes since, and not be dogmatic about a certain practise, point of view or tradition - merely because this was the first one we came into contact with, and hence narrowly cling to it as "biblical truth".
After all, Buddhism had spread over large geographical areas spanning different cultures across over 2500 years. So like all other religions, institutions, it would have faced many developments and is not monolithic.
The thrust of this book is to point out the superiority conceit in major Buddhist traditions, their historical development, and why recognising these as conceit is important because they are not aligned with Buddha’s teachings of seeing the truth. The aim is to promote mutual respect and collaboration because each tradition has its value and contribution to Buddhism.
In this book, Bhikkhu Analayo discusses the superiority conceit in 4 areas:
1) Androcentricism – especially in the Theravada tradition which refuses ordination of women based on a technicality that the bhikkhuni (nun) order is extinct and it was indispensable to ordain nuns in collaboration with bhikkhus (monks).
2) Mahayana Tradition – which looks at Theravada tradition as a lesser, inferior vehicle for enlightenment and sees their own Bodhisattva ideal as superior.
3) Theravada Tradition – which thinks that they are the oldest school and have preserved the Buddhist scriptures and practises unchanged from Buddha’s time, and hence superior to other traditions.
4) Secular Buddhism – which has adopted a western, materialist and iconoclastic lens in viewing Buddhism; has distorted and undermined the core doctrine of Buddhism, and considers many of its core doctrine as superstition.
One of my family member is a Mahayana Buddhist. This was his first contact with Buddhism and he has stayed with this tradition, especially since he is fluent in Chinese. Whenever he attends other Buddhist events or hear Buddhist teachings from early Buddhist texts or from monks who happen to be from the Theravada tradition, he will inevitably say: “According to Mahayana......Mahayana say this, that….” basically to refute or undermine what was taught and as if the Mahayana teachings he had received was superior.
Or he would keep harping Theravada tradition as being 小成法, that is, the Lesser Vehicle (or Hinayana) which is a derogatory term used by those from the Mahayana tradition which they consider a superior later "revelation" by Buddha. He sees Mahayana as the Greater Vehicle which is more compassionate because they embody the Bodhisattva ideal, that this, whose who are on the way to enlightenment postponing their own Buddha-hood until all sentient beings are saved. And he kept saying that those who pursue the Bodhisattva path are superior to arahants.
I always find this attitude strange and annoying.* And this Mahayana attitude is one of those that Bhikkhu Analayo pointed out as a superiority conceit. I feel so vindicated.
It is interesting that Bhikku Analayo pointed out that both the arahant and bodhisattva path were different vocations practised among early monastics, even side by side within the same school – and that non was considered superior than than the other. It was a personal choice. The ideal of the bodhisattva and its eventual primacy within the Mahayana tradition was a later development, which coincided with the gradual reverence of the Buddha as an omniscient being which was never implied in the EBTs. (No wonder it is seen as "revelation" by the Buddha himself - like almost a divine revelation.)
It just baffles me that Buddha did not postpone his own enlightenment, and neither did his famous disciples who became arahants. So where did this “superior” bodhisattva ideal and path come from? It is a later development. In the EBTs, it was very clear that Buddha was searching for liberation for himself, and not to save the world or all sentient beings. It was only after he was enlightened, he was debating with himself if he should teach because the teachings are not easily understood by the ordinary person because we are so engrossed and trapped in our mundane lives, way of seeing the world through our self and way of reacting to the world through craving.
The Theravada tradition had also innovated over time, and some of the later developments included gradually emphasising body and breath in meditation, and eventually on breath alone – and de-emphasising joy and the other divide abodes. I fine this very interesting because joy is a very important motivator, especially spiritual joy. It helps us along our path and our meditation, although we are not to be attached to it. Also, the notion of fear as being indispensable part of progress in meditation was introduced later, and was not in the EBTs. Wonderful and encouraging!
Modern metta meditation is person-centric, asking us to focus on metta of loving kindness on ourselves first, then on those we love, then neutral persons and lastly on those we dislike. But this was a later innovation, because in the EBTs, the reaching was to meditate on the divine abodes (loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity) in all directions to practise their boundless nature. Interesting!
There are lots of other gems too eg how the Theravada tradition see Pali as the original language spoken by the Buddha (scholars know it is not, but that Pali was a language close to what Buddha would have used). Pali is like a magic language to this tradition which is very conservative. And when there is uncertainty in pronouncing certain terms, during important events such as ordination of monks, they even recite a verse twice to make sure that at least one of the pronunciations is the right one so that the ordination is legitimate eg “Buddham” vs “Buddhang”. But this is contrary to Buddha’s point that language the Dhamma should be taught in the learner’s language, and that language in itself is limiting.
It is not an easy read because Bhikku Analayo really knows his stuff and gives a lot of historical evidences, some of which I am not familiar with. This book is supposed to be a simpler version of a fuller one, and was written for the general public. Even so, I did struggle sometimes but it is still a worthy read.
*It is not because I think Theravada is the best. I do not adhere to any single tradition but my earliest exposure to Buddhism was with western Theravada monks who happen to place importance to studying and examining the Early Buddhist Texts (EBTs) – which is contained in the Pali Canon that happens to belong to the Theravada school.
The Pali Canon is the oldest and most complete/intact set of Buddhist literature available to date from all the ancient Buddhists schools which have become extinct. It is important to point out that the Pali Canon is not equivalent to EBTs – but the EBTs are found within the Pali Canon. Comparisons of the EBTs, namely the Nikayas, show exact replicas in the Agamas which is the oldest core of literature of the Mahayana tradition – almost word for word. So these similarities mean they can be traced to a common source.
I believe that we must look at the texts that are closest to Buddha’s time, and understand what was taught in the EBTs and practised in early Buddhism vs what are later developments and innovation. It does not mean that all later innovations are of no value or are untrue but we must go back to the earliest source first, and this is the way we can see what were the changes since, and not be dogmatic about a certain practise, point of view or tradition - merely because this was the first one we came into contact with, and hence narrowly cling to it as "biblical truth".
After all, Buddhism had spread over large geographical areas spanning different cultures across over 2500 years. So like all other religions, institutions, it would have faced many developments and is not monolithic.
September 21, 2021
Interesting as irenic polemic: no good reasons for Mahayanists, Theravadins, Secular Buddhists, or the male-identified to think themselves superior, let's all be friends and learn from one another. Deploys academic textual and historical analyses to show ideas and social formations in development. No absolute truths -- just dependently originated forms that Buddhists can take, leave, or analyze.
EXCEPTING what the Buddha himself taught. Don't mess with that stuff!
EXCEPTING what the Buddha himself taught. Don't mess with that stuff!
November 22, 2023
This was a great read from a traditionally educated and western-educated bhukkhu with a strong grasp on Early Buddhist suttas as well as the scholarly-critical consensuses around them. He does a good job of discussing "superiority conceits" in broad schools, and I found his discussion of androcentrism, Mahayana Buddhism, Theravada Buddhism, and Secular Buddhism to be engaging and informative. While I have practiced in both Theravada and Mahayana traditions, I found that the critiques of Mahayana superiority conceit most familiar, but his addressing the number of Christian missionary misunderstandings naturalized in some presentations of Secular Buddhism to be surprising and convincing as well as his discussions of shifts from early Pali discourses from Theravada doctrine (which I was unaware even though I was familiar with the material). Excellent book.
December 16, 2024
Testo molto interessante e di cui non si può che condividere la netta conclusione e sintesi.
Analayo procede con chiarezza e fervore scientifico, nello stesso tempo con rigore accademico e senza livore.
Alcuni passi forse sono molto tecnici, ma la volontà di essere compreso, i frequenti recap nonché la sintesi dei diversi capitoli aiutano anche il lettore distratto a seguire il percorso logico del monaco, nella disamina attenta e ampia dei testi antichi.
Bella anche la presa di posizione su Batchelor, che non è motivata da rancori personali, bensì da una lettura puntuale delle scritture.
Analayo procede con chiarezza e fervore scientifico, nello stesso tempo con rigore accademico e senza livore.
Alcuni passi forse sono molto tecnici, ma la volontà di essere compreso, i frequenti recap nonché la sintesi dei diversi capitoli aiutano anche il lettore distratto a seguire il percorso logico del monaco, nella disamina attenta e ampia dei testi antichi.
Bella anche la presa di posizione su Batchelor, che non è motivata da rancori personali, bensì da una lettura puntuale delle scritture.
August 13, 2024
Very good, very well presented. Analayo is one of the best scholar's of early buddhism and by his words it's easy to see his compassion and understanding for different buddhist traditions and views, it shows maturity and intelligence. Want to read more books from him.
February 28, 2021
esifhwqpeoruipe
this book confuses me ... what about the superiority conceit in scholarly traditions ...
this book confuses me ... what about the superiority conceit in scholarly traditions ...
September 13, 2022
Highly recommend this book for those engaged in any school of Buddhism.
January 1, 2025
absolutely packed with fascinating information. probably only useful to someone with a solid preexisting understanding of theravada and mahayana traditions and doctrine.
March 20, 2021
A quarter of the book is dedicated to what I sense as an almost panic-stricken critique of Batchelor’s pragmatic translation of Gotama’s unique teachings. The conceit lies within Analyo’s assertion that the true interpretation of Gotama’s teaching lies within the minds and realms of self-referencing academics and monastic scholars. Batchelor presents a faithful translation and long-awaited transformation of Gotama’s teaching, which, is accessible to every human and provides a inspirational springboard to the possibility of an ethical and creative life, relevant to modernity. In the face of the decline of institutionalized religion I give tribute to Batchelor for his courageous stance, honour to Gotama for his insight and wisdom and gratitude to the various religious vehicles which have carried the Dharma though the centuries. But it is now time to move on.
June 27, 2024
A uniquely interesting topic on Buddhism, that takes a sincerely honest look at the arrogance of Buddhist Traditions. This is very welcomed considering most people will not want to criticise their own religious faith. The book is clearly aimed at a Buddhist audience leading practitioners to either self reflect from how they perceive others as well as learn about the haughty views found theologically and institutionally in other Buddhist Traditions. Bhikkhu Analayo does well to not only layout the superiority conceit found in Buddhism, but to more importantly debunk each view in an effort to humble Buddhist practitioners world over and create further harmony amongst the global community - an effort that I feel very strongly about myself, so I applaud Bhikkhu Analayo's endeavours here.
The book is divided into four main categories:
1) Men perceiving themselves superior to women practitioners
2) Mahayanist perceiving themselves superior to Theravadins
3) Theravadins perceiving themselves superior to all other Buddhist schools
4) Secular Buddhists perceiving themselves superior to all other Buddhist schools
Whilst the content itself is quite good for the most part, the first chapter needs to be a book in its own right. It only focusses on the Theravada school that Bhikkhu Analayo is apart of. There is a lot to be said about the treatment and perception of female practitioners in many other traditions.
Secondly, I was quite surprised by the above format. I believe that the book would be much better if the first division is siphoned off for its own book and replaced with a chapter on how the Vajrayana Buddhists perceive themselves superior to all other schools of Buddhism. Vajrayanists have at the core of their belief system that they are on the 'quick path' to a state of enlightenment superior to all other traditions (they add a mind of great bliss which is absent in other Buddhist schools).
If the above mentioned alteration was executed, then the book will exclusively focus on how each of the four major Buddhist school types think themselves to be better than others.
Another criticism I had of the book was the obscure narrative of how Mahayanists perceive themselves superior to others. The chapter here opens up about the unviability of the 32 major and minor signs of a Bodhisattva which seems no way connected to superiority conceit. Only later does it become clear that Bhikkhu Analayo is beginning the chapter by undermining the arrogance of the Mahayana position before laying out what the Mahayanist position is. Being from the Mahayana tradition myself, it would have been better and easier to argue that the Mahayana position asserts itself superior due to its teaching on Great Compassion that leads to a greater state of mind than what the Theravadins develop, to the extent that Theravadins are perceived as self-centred beings with no interest in being compassionate or kind to others (this is of course not true!).
I appreciate that a lot of the criticism I have is down to the authors lake of engagement and exposure to other Buddhist traditions. I hope that a revision of this comes out that to a degree adapts the changes I have outlined above.
TLDR: A great topic to be covered, with Bhikkhu Analayo's humble approach being most suitable for covering this topic. Perhaps this needed to be co-authored to revisit the Mahayanist position which could be made clearer, and to create a new chapter on Vajrayana Buddhism. In addition I would like to see a whole book dedicated to debunking the superiority conceit that leads to the unfair treatment of women in a wide variety of Buddhist traditions. The chapter on it here, whilst good content, is too limited.
The book is divided into four main categories:
1) Men perceiving themselves superior to women practitioners
2) Mahayanist perceiving themselves superior to Theravadins
3) Theravadins perceiving themselves superior to all other Buddhist schools
4) Secular Buddhists perceiving themselves superior to all other Buddhist schools
Whilst the content itself is quite good for the most part, the first chapter needs to be a book in its own right. It only focusses on the Theravada school that Bhikkhu Analayo is apart of. There is a lot to be said about the treatment and perception of female practitioners in many other traditions.
Secondly, I was quite surprised by the above format. I believe that the book would be much better if the first division is siphoned off for its own book and replaced with a chapter on how the Vajrayana Buddhists perceive themselves superior to all other schools of Buddhism. Vajrayanists have at the core of their belief system that they are on the 'quick path' to a state of enlightenment superior to all other traditions (they add a mind of great bliss which is absent in other Buddhist schools).
If the above mentioned alteration was executed, then the book will exclusively focus on how each of the four major Buddhist school types think themselves to be better than others.
Another criticism I had of the book was the obscure narrative of how Mahayanists perceive themselves superior to others. The chapter here opens up about the unviability of the 32 major and minor signs of a Bodhisattva which seems no way connected to superiority conceit. Only later does it become clear that Bhikkhu Analayo is beginning the chapter by undermining the arrogance of the Mahayana position before laying out what the Mahayanist position is. Being from the Mahayana tradition myself, it would have been better and easier to argue that the Mahayana position asserts itself superior due to its teaching on Great Compassion that leads to a greater state of mind than what the Theravadins develop, to the extent that Theravadins are perceived as self-centred beings with no interest in being compassionate or kind to others (this is of course not true!).
I appreciate that a lot of the criticism I have is down to the authors lake of engagement and exposure to other Buddhist traditions. I hope that a revision of this comes out that to a degree adapts the changes I have outlined above.
TLDR: A great topic to be covered, with Bhikkhu Analayo's humble approach being most suitable for covering this topic. Perhaps this needed to be co-authored to revisit the Mahayanist position which could be made clearer, and to create a new chapter on Vajrayana Buddhism. In addition I would like to see a whole book dedicated to debunking the superiority conceit that leads to the unfair treatment of women in a wide variety of Buddhist traditions. The chapter on it here, whilst good content, is too limited.
May 9, 2022
Being fairly new to Buddhism, reading this book helped to answer some questions I had concerning the differences between Hinayana, Mahayana, early Buddhist thought and the role of women in Buddhism. I might have to reread it in the future again.
Gave it one star less because in the conclusion he mentioned climate change. Which to me seemed unnecessary since nothing in the previous chapters mentions it.
Personally I think it’s kind of disappointing to see yet another Buddhist promote climate change. And in books which are completely unrelated to the subject, it’s just a bit annoying.
This is the first book by the author I finished. As a non native English person, the language being used was a bit hard at times to understand. But I did get through it at a decent pace. Will attempt the Satipatthana books next, which seems be somewhat more difficult to read.
Gave it one star less because in the conclusion he mentioned climate change. Which to me seemed unnecessary since nothing in the previous chapters mentions it.
Personally I think it’s kind of disappointing to see yet another Buddhist promote climate change. And in books which are completely unrelated to the subject, it’s just a bit annoying.
This is the first book by the author I finished. As a non native English person, the language being used was a bit hard at times to understand. But I did get through it at a decent pace. Will attempt the Satipatthana books next, which seems be somewhat more difficult to read.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews