Why Theravada always talks about Pannattis?
Why Theravada always talks bad about Pannattis?
The answer can be inferred by asking another question.
What is the most Closest Pannatti to us?
The answer is “I”.
The main part of Theravada practice is eliminating “I”.
Could you infer the answer?
Another related topic: Conventional Reality is not Impermanent!
“The main part of Theravada practice is eliminating “I”.”
I don’t think this sentence describes Buddha’s teachings well. That could be misunderstood by certain people, foolishly thinking that Buddhism is about eliminating “I”, which is Ucchedaditthi.
Rather, I would say that Theravada teaches us to realise that “I” is a merely conceptual illusion and not to be taken as real and in ultimate sense.
Paññatti is necessary for samatha meditation because it is conceptually free the tilakkhaṇa. So it is not always “bad” in Buddhism. One of the biggest mistakes in samatha meditation (ānāpānasati) is people are stuck “feeling” the tactile sensation of the breath rather than contemplating the concept of the breath ehem… mentally.
Yes, what I should have written was “eliminating ‘I’-ditthi”.(believing five-masses as an “I”)
Yes, bhante. Pannatti is needed even for daily life.
What I should have written was “Why does Theravada always discriminate Pannattis” or something like that.