Why such a difference?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by daverupa »

kirk5a wrote:
daverupa wrote: It's fairly well-established to be wholly absent, and is a key difference between Mahayana and Theravada. You'd have to find it somewhere in the SuttaVinaya, but it isn't there.
What about amata-dhatu? Which is the nibbana-dhatu. That is in the suttas of course. What if Mahayana just used the term "Buddha-dhatu" for that? The "deathless-element" is the "unbound element" is the "awake element" ?
Most of Mahayana is like that: based on certain ideas present in Pali, but always just a shade of a change in a definition or an application. Not that these formulations aren't possibly derivable from Pali, but Mahayana makes these ideas central and explicit, and the result goes far afield. As an easy example, the MahaParinirvana Sutra treats Buddha-nature in a way that doesn't resemble Pali discourse on amata-dhatu at all, so the idea that "Buddha-dhatu" is a simply synonym is false.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
alan
Posts: 3111
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by alan »

Rock on Dave.
User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by lyndon taylor »

all i know is when i asked about buddha nature at the therevada temple were i was a monk, briefly, they not only knew what i was talking about but said they believed in it a lot of this propaganda about therevada thats being taught on the internet directly contradicts what is being taught at therevada temples, this thai forest thing for instance is not a mainstream movement of traditional therevada and was invented quite recently.
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
User avatar
kirk5a
Posts: 1959
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by kirk5a »

daverupa wrote:Most of Mahayana is like that: based on certain ideas present in Pali, but always just a shade of a change in a definition or an application. Not that these formulations aren't possibly derivable from Pali, but Mahayana makes these ideas central and explicit, and the result goes far afield. As an easy example, the MahaParinirvana Sutra treats Buddha-nature in a way that doesn't resemble Pali discourse on amata-dhatu at all, so the idea that "Buddha-dhatu" is a simply synonym is false.
I don't study Mahayana Sutras at all really, just a thought. In looking over the summary of the MahaParinirvana Sutra on Wikipedia there is the quote "The Tathagata also teaches, for the sake of all beings, that, truly, there is the Self in all phenomena." I'd agree that something definitely has gone wrong there :smile:
"When one thing is practiced & pursued, ignorance is abandoned, clear knowing arises, the conceit 'I am' is abandoned, latent tendencies are uprooted, fetters are abandoned. Which one thing? Mindfulness immersed in the body." -AN 1.230
alan
Posts: 3111
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by alan »

Hi BB
In response to your original question, I'd say the Tibetan teachings are a mutation, caused by time, distance and isolation.
There is an idea that some Mahayana concepts are a rephrasings of old ideas, but I find that to be unsupportable. Same with the notion that certain concepts were not made explicit, or that there are many ways to achieve the same goal. None of these ideas are found in the suttas. Some are directly refuted.
So I'd venture to say that what passes for Buddhism as expressed by the Tibetan tradition does not have much relevance for most Therevadins. Up to you to decide what you want to do with that fact.
User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by lyndon taylor »

if you were catholic would you have no concern for what protestants believe
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by ground »

Beautiful Breath wrote:
TMingyur wrote:
Beautiful Breath wrote:Does anything like that exist in the Theravada?
I don't think so. I think this Madhyamaka approach is considered a deviation from what the Buddha taught ... and I would agree that it is a deviation.

Kind regards

Hi,

How/why is this not what he taught? Surely Shunyata is an undeniable 'fact' that gors deeper into the nature of phenomena than Dependent Origination - which I see as one aspect of phenomena that points to its Emptiness.

Metta
It is the approach that is a deviation. The approach counters what it purports to achieve.

Kind regards
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Lyndon,
lyndon taylor wrote:if you were catholic would you have no concern for what protestants believe
To see why some of us are really quite indifferent to things outside of the Pali Canon, here's an extract from the Mahaparinibbana Sutta explaining why....
And there the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Now, bhikkhus, I shall make known to you the four great references. Listen and pay heed to my words." And those bhikkhus answered, saying:

"So be it, Lord."

Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief. Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.'

"In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve."
Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by lyndon taylor »

and the buddha, who was raised a brahman, spoke and wrote sanskrit fluently, never ever ever spoke or wrote a single teaching in sanskrit, when pali in his time had no written alphabet, can say this without doubt? if you can't say this then at least possibly some of the buddhas teachings were written down and preserved in sanskrit as well as pali, thats what this is all about, two languagues and the therevadins denial that buddha was bilingual and literate, and im not even mahayana most of my training has been therevada, but not internet therevada which has a whole mind of its own.
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
Kenshou
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by Kenshou »

It doesn't really mean a darn thing that a text is in Sanskrit. Sanskrit has been used extensively. There are a lot of other factors to consider when critically dating and analyzing ancient texts.

And just because the Buddha was probably familiar with the language is no good reason to assume that whatever Mahayana texts are buddhavacana.
User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by lyndon taylor »

the buddha wasnt just familiar with sanskrit it was his native born language, pali was a second language to the buddha that he was probably little exposed to until he left his fathers palace.

i never said all sanskrit texts are from the buddha, just postulating that probably some were and that was the start of mahayana, obviously most of the sanskrit texts are by later writers but i get the same impression from the pali canon, its not all directly the buddhas word, and half of these proof sutras which are being bandied around may be suspect as well
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
Kenshou
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by Kenshou »

the buddha wasnt just familiar with sanskrit it was his native born language pali was a second language
Most likely it was one of a variety of middle indo-aryan prakrits (which Pali is or more likely was derived from), Sanskrit proper would not have been the common language by that period. It is debatable whether Pali as we know it was ever really a spoken language. I've gone off on a tangent, though...
User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by lyndon taylor »

a not spoken language with no written form, and this is how the scriptures are recorded, so what your saying is the buddha and his followers had no idea what he was saying, i know this is ridiculous but think about what you are saying
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by Dan74 »

kirk5a wrote:
daverupa wrote:Most of Mahayana is like that: based on certain ideas present in Pali, but always just a shade of a change in a definition or an application. Not that these formulations aren't possibly derivable from Pali, but Mahayana makes these ideas central and explicit, and the result goes far afield. As an easy example, the MahaParinirvana Sutra treats Buddha-nature in a way that doesn't resemble Pali discourse on amata-dhatu at all, so the idea that "Buddha-dhatu" is a simply synonym is false.
I don't study Mahayana Sutras at all really, just a thought. In looking over the summary of the MahaParinirvana Sutra on Wikipedia there is the quote "The Tathagata also teaches, for the sake of all beings, that, truly, there is the Self in all phenomena." I'd agree that something definitely has gone wrong there :smile:
Mahaparinirvana Sutra is in a special place of its own in Mahayana corpus and is very different to other sutras. Still my guess is that what it means by "Self" is very different to what the Buddha meant when he taught its absence in all manner of things.
_/|\_
Reductor
Posts: 1382
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:52 am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Re: Why such a difference?

Post by Reductor »

lyndon taylor wrote:and the buddha, who was raised a brahman, spoke and wrote sanskrit fluently, never ever ever spoke or wrote a single teaching in sanskrit, when pali in his time had no written alphabet, can say this without doubt? if you can't say this then at least possibly some of the buddhas teachings were written down and preserved in sanskrit as well as pali, thats what this is all about, two languagues and the therevadins denial that buddha was bilingual and literate, and im not even mahayana most of my training has been therevada, but not internet therevada which has a whole mind of its own.
This is the first time that i have ever heard that the buddha was a brahmin. Please provide a reference.

Also, sanskrit was primarily a religious language even in the buddhas time, if i am not mistaken. It was obscure then because the brahmins desired their treachings to be obscure to the muddled masses over whom they wished to be elevated.

Am i wrong?
Post Reply