Is mahayana Buddism?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
whynotme
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by whynotme »

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Sects, sects, sects — that's all you people ever think about!

Mahāyāna, Theravāda — its all just Papañca

Just try to understand the Dhamma (i.e. the Four Noble Truths) and develop the path of insight.
Sir, what is wrong with sects?

Regards
Please stop following me
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by Cittasanto »

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Sects, sects, sects — that's all you people ever think about!

Mahāyāna, Theravāda — its all just Papañca

Just try to understand the Dhamma (i.e. the Four Noble Truths) and develop the path of insight.
:-)
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Bhikkhu Pesala
Posts: 4646
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by Bhikkhu Pesala »

whynotme wrote:Sir, what is wrong with sects?
A sect has split off and deviated from the true Dhamma. There were no sects when the Buddha started teaching. Most of the monks followed the teaching diligently and gained personal realisation of the Dhamma for themselves. There was no danger for them to fall into wrong views again.

Devadatta created the first schism in the Sangha — the first sect. A hundred years after the Buddha's passing away, other monks started accepting money, and doing other things contrary to the Buddha's teaching. The Second Buddhist Council was held to re-affirm what was the true Dhamma and true Vinaya.

Nowadays, there are many more sects that follow their own ideas, not the Buddha's teaching. To learn how to discriminate between Dhamma and non-Dhamma, one should study the Dhamma/Vinaya carefully and practice in accordance with the teaching to the best of one's ability.

Don't pay any attention to what others do, one should follow the Sallekha Dhamma and try to develop the Noble Eightfold Path. If you keep to the path, you won't get side-tracked in the forest of views.
BlogPāli FontsIn This Very LifeBuddhist ChroniclesSoftware (Upasampadā: 24th June, 1979)
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Nowadays, there are many more sects that follow their own ideas, not the Buddha's teaching. To learn how to discriminate between Dhamma and non-Dhamma, one should study the Dhamma/Vinaya carefully and practice in accordance with the teaching to the best of one's ability.
:goodpost:

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
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by Cittasanto »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Nowadays, there are many more sects that follow their own ideas, not the Buddha's teaching. To learn how to discriminate between Dhamma and non-Dhamma, one should study the Dhamma/Vinaya carefully and practice in accordance with the teaching to the best of one's ability.
:goodpost:

Metta,
Retro. :)
Agreed!
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
whynotme
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by whynotme »

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:
whynotme wrote:Sir, what is wrong with sects?
A sect has split off and deviated from the true Dhamma. There were no sects when the Buddha started teaching. Most of the monks followed the teaching diligently and gained personal realisation of the Dhamma for themselves. There was no danger for them to fall into wrong views again.

Devadatta created the first schism in the Sangha — the first sect. A hundred years after the Buddha's passing away, other monks started accepting money, and doing other things contrary to the Buddha's teaching. The Second Buddhist Council was held to re-affirm what was the true Dhamma and true Vinaya.

Nowadays, there are many more sects that follow their own ideas, not the Buddha's teaching. To learn how to discriminate between Dhamma and non-Dhamma, one should study the Dhamma/Vinaya carefully and practice in accordance with the teaching to the best of one's ability.

Don't pay any attention to what others do, one should follow the Sallekha Dhamma and try to develop the Noble Eightfold Path. If you keep to the path, you won't get side-tracked in the forest of views.
Thank you sir

Regards.
Please stop following me
User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by m0rl0ck »

sect
(skt)
n.

1. A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice.
2. A religious body, especially one that has separated from a larger denomination.
3. A faction united by common interests or beliefs.

What the above definition doesnt mention is that each one thinks it has an exclusive chokehold on truth and authenticity. :D
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig
User avatar
Modus.Ponens
Posts: 3853
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:38 am
Location: Gallifrey

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by Modus.Ponens »

And here I was, tinking that Venerable Pesala was making Ajhan Brahm's joke about sects. It turns out that it was a teaching. :mrgreen:

Where is your recently found humour vein, Bhante? :tongue:

No disrespect meant.

:anjali:
'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' - Jhana Sutta
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by Kim OHara »

Modus.Ponens wrote:And here I was, tinking that Venerable Pesala was making Ajhan Brahm's joke about sects. It turns out that it was a teaching. :mrgreen:

Where is your recently found humour vein, Bhante? :tongue:

No disrespect meant.

:anjali:
Here I was, thinking it was both a joke and a teaching. ;)

:namaste:
Kim
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by Nyana »

FTR, according to the Mahāyāna Adhyāśayasaṃcodana Sūtra as quoted by Śāntideva in his Compendium of Training (Śikṣāsamuccaya), four principles indicate that an utterance (or statement, teaching, etc.) is compatible with the speech of the Buddha:

(i) it is connected with truth, not with what is untrue;
(ii) it is connected with dharma, not with what is not dharma;
(iii) it leads to giving up defilement, not to increasing defilement;
(iv) it points out the praiseworthy qualities of nirvāṇa, not those of saṃsāra.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by tiltbillings »

If you want to see the Dhamma in the Mahayana get hold of Herbert Guenther's translation of Gampopa's THE JEWEL ORNAMENT OF LIBERATION, which can be gotten used fairly cheaply.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
whynotme
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by whynotme »

Ñāṇa wrote:FTR, according to the Mahāyāna Adhyāśayasaṃcodana Sūtra as quoted by Śāntideva in his Compendium of Training (Śikṣāsamuccaya), four principles indicate that an utterance (or statement, teaching, etc.) is compatible with the speech of the Buddha:

(i) it is connected with truth, not with what is untrue;
(ii) it is connected with dharma, not with what is not dharma;
(iii) it leads to giving up defilement, not to increasing defilement;
(iv) it points out the praiseworthy qualities of nirvāṇa, not those of saṃsāra.
Well, the Buddha said that one will make jewel dhamma disappear sooner and get bad kammas when say something the Buddha didn't told as he told, say something he told as he didn't told:
Like the most of mahayana suttas weren't told by the Buddha but said were told by him (this action will make dhamma disappear sooner)
Like said that arahant is inferior to Bodhivastta when comes to freedom (the Buddha didn't taught that but said that taught that, also this action will make dhamma disappear sooner).
Praiseworthy qualities of Nirvana but attack an arahant to attain that for himself (this too, will make dhamma disapper sooner)

Most of mahayana suttas are like that, they contradict themselves. If they want to tell something, why fakes it as the Buddhas words? Why don't be themselves like many other monks? The Nikayas weren't all said by the Buddha but people have no problem with that, why mahayanists needed to lie? Is lying connected with truth? Is lying connected with dharma?

Compatibility is one thing, lying about dhamma is a whole different thing.

Regards.
Please stop following me
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by Nyana »

whynotme wrote:Well, the Buddha said....
How do you know what the Buddha said? Were you there?
whynotme
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by whynotme »

Ñāṇa wrote:
whynotme wrote:Well, the Buddha said....
How do you know what the Buddha said? Were you there?
Of course not I was not there, but it is in Nikaya. It is well preserved and doesn't contradict itself.

Regards.
Please stop following me
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Is mahayana Buddism?

Post by Dan74 »

whynotme wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:FTR, according to the Mahāyāna Adhyāśayasaṃcodana Sūtra as quoted by Śāntideva in his Compendium of Training (Śikṣāsamuccaya), four principles indicate that an utterance (or statement, teaching, etc.) is compatible with the speech of the Buddha:

(i) it is connected with truth, not with what is untrue;
(ii) it is connected with dharma, not with what is not dharma;
(iii) it leads to giving up defilement, not to increasing defilement;
(iv) it points out the praiseworthy qualities of nirvāṇa, not those of saṃsāra.
Well, the Buddha said that one will make jewel dhamma disappear sooner and get bad kammas when say something the Buddha didn't told as he told, say something he told as he didn't told:
Like the most of mahayana suttas weren't told by the Buddha but said were told by him (this action will make dhamma disappear sooner)
Like said that arahant is inferior to Bodhivastta when comes to freedom (the Buddha didn't taught that but said that taught that, also this action will make dhamma disappear sooner).
Praiseworthy qualities of Nirvana but attack an arahant to attain that for himself (this too, will make dhamma disapper sooner)

Most of mahayana suttas are like that, they contradict themselves. If they want to tell something, why fakes it as the Buddhas words? Why don't be themselves like many other monks? The Nikayas weren't all said by the Buddha but people have no problem with that, why mahayanists needed to lie? Is lying connected with truth? Is lying connected with dharma?

Compatibility is one thing, lying about dhamma is a whole different thing.

Regards.
Dear whynotme

First we do not know for certain whether or not all some or none of the Mahayana sutras were taught by the Buddha in the literal sense or in some other sense we may not be ready to understand.

Second, since teachings were often passed orally before being written down, the origin of the teachings could have been very obscure even 2 thousand years ago. Were they taught by a great arahat? Were they taught by the Buddha himself? Were they received as revelations?

In any case this kind of simplistic notion that they were forgeries, as if the author tried to fake the Buddha's signature on them and pass them off as the original teachings is very far from the truth. I know people try to use them to discredit Mahayana as opposed to authentic and true Theravada, but the reality is very different. Theravada itself contains many teachings ascribed to the Buddha that modern scholarship puts in grave doubt. So what of it? People search for the authentic Buddhavacana, expending a great deal of effort.

To me, it seems kind of absurd. If the Buddha's teachings work, then people do attain liberation. Why not be open to other teachers who had the chance to absorb and develop some of the teachings? I mean Euclid was the father of Geometry, but we don't only study Euclid, do we?

Anyway, all this has been said before and by greater people than anyone here, so no one will be convinced. Ajahn Amaro studied Mahayana, Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Dune Athulo quoted Mahayana masters, Bhikkhu Bodhi studies and lives with Mahayana monks. And? People will still imply that it is Adhamma, corrupted, perverse, etc, just like our Ven Pesala did in his more outspoken times.

Well, what can I say? To each their own. Not everybody has to love Mahayana, but refraining from passing judgment of what one does not understand, refraining from generating unwholesome thoughts and speech towards fellow Buddhists, is probably a good idea for everyone.
_/|\_
Post Reply