The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Wizard in the Forest
Posts: 699
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:16 am
Location: House in Forest of Illusions

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by Wizard in the Forest »

Okay.... this is weird. Upon reading this... :jumping: Ohh' kay Alice is out of the Poppy fields now... whooosh :woohoo:
"One is not born a woman, but becomes one."- Simone de Beauvoir
User avatar
Wizard in the Forest
Posts: 699
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:16 am
Location: House in Forest of Illusions

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by Wizard in the Forest »

TMingyur wrote:It is utterly wrong to refer to Vajrayana sources as "the Mahayana" or even "classical Indian Mahayana"
Kind regards
Can you clarify?
"One is not born a woman, but becomes one."- Simone de Beauvoir
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

TMingyur wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Herbert Guenther's translation of Gompopa'sThe Jewel Ornament of Liberation gives a very classic view of the Mahayana and is worth a read. From that you should get some idea of where the Theravada and classical Indian Mahayana touch and where they separate.
It is utterly wrong to refer to Vajrayana sources as "the Mahayana" or even "classical Indian Mahayana"


Kind regards
First of all this hardly a Vajrayana text and secondly it present a classical Indian take on the Mahayana - okay - from a Tibetan standpoint.
>> 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
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by ground »

tiltbillings wrote:
TMingyur wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Herbert Guenther's translation of Gompopa'sThe Jewel Ornament of Liberation gives a very classic view of the Mahayana and is worth a read. From that you should get some idea of where the Theravada and classical Indian Mahayana touch and where they separate.
It is utterly wrong to refer to Vajrayana sources as "the Mahayana" or even "classical Indian Mahayana"


Kind regards
First of all this hardly a Vajrayana text and secondly it present a classical Indian take on the Mahayana - okay - from a Tibetan standpoint.
You can hardly find any tibetan source that is not Vajrayana. And of course Gampopa and his Kagyu school "are" Vajrayana.

Kind regards
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by Nyana »

tiltbillings wrote:Herbert Guenther's translation of Gompopa'sThe Jewel Ornament of Liberation gives a very classic view of the Mahayana and is worth a read. From that you should get some idea of where the Theravada and classical Indian Mahayana touch and where they separate.
Khenpo Konchog Gyaltsen Rinpoche's translation of The Jewel Ornament of Liberation is a more contemporary, accessible read.

An even better source of Indian Mahāyāna thought would be The Way of the Bodhisattva by Śāntideva.

Or Four Illusions: Candrakīrti's Advice for Travelers on the Bodhisattva Path by Candrakīrti.


:buddha1:
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

TMingyur wrote: You can hardly find any tibetan source that is not Vajrayana. And of course Gampopa and his Kagyu school "are" Vajrayana.
The Vajrayana in that book is, at best, minimal. The bulk of it is standard Mahayana foundation teachings.
>> 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
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

Ñāṇa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Herbert Guenther's translation of Gompopa'sThe Jewel Ornament of Liberation gives a very classic view of the Mahayana and is worth a read. From that you should get some idea of where the Theravada and classical Indian Mahayana touch and where they separate.
Khenpo Konchog Gyaltsen Rinpoche's translation of The Jewel Ornament of Liberation is a more contemporary, accessible read.
I prefer Guenther's book.
An even better source of Indian Mahāyāna thought would be The Way of the Bodhisattva by Śāntideva.
I would prefer his Compendium if it were in a better translation.
>> 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
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

Virgo wrote: Simply read about the "two truths" and Madhyamaka. It is all contained therein. I have not inaccurately displayed how they approach emptiness.
I have, which is why I do not find your accounting all that credible.
>> 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
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by Nyana »

tiltbillings wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:An even better source of Indian Mahāyāna thought would be The Way of the Bodhisattva by Śāntideva.
I would prefer his Compendium if it were in a better translation.
I've heard that Lozang Jamspal (Columbia University) has made or is in the process of making a new translation. Much needed and long, long overdue.
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by ground »

tiltbillings wrote:
TMingyur wrote: You can hardly find any tibetan source that is not Vajrayana. And of course Gampopa and his Kagyu school "are" Vajrayana.
The Vajrayana in that book is, at best, minimal. The bulk of it is standard Mahayana foundation teachings.
That depends on what you prefer to label "Vajrayana". Actually "Vajrayana" is a view that pervades the rest. If you refer to "Vajrayana" solely in the sense of methods classically labelled as "Varjrayana practice" then you may be right. But the impression you then get is misleading.
tiltbillings wrote:
Ñāṇa wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Herbert Guenther's translation of Gompopa'sThe Jewel Ornament of Liberation gives a very classic view of the Mahayana and is worth a read. From that you should get some idea of where the Theravada and classical Indian Mahayana touch and where they separate.
Khenpo Konchog Gyaltsen Rinpoche's translation of The Jewel Ornament of Liberation is a more contemporary, accessible read.
I prefer Guenther's book.
Because it supports your view of Mahayana in the first place, right? But this may be caused by "Vajrayana" view being acctually the view you can pin down as deviant very easily which may not be the case if you referred to classical Indian sutra Mahayana which actually teaches methods not differing from those in the Pali canon except the words and terminology applied may be different.

But of course the Mahayana attitude/motivation is prevalent also in sutra Mahayana and that and all the accompanying narratives ("bhumis" etc) may not be findable in the pali suttas.

Kind regards
Last edited by ground on Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

TMingyur wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
TMingyur wrote: You can hardly find any tibetan source that is not Vajrayana. And of course Gampopa and his Kagyu school "are" Vajrayana.
The Vajrayana in that book is, at best, minimal. The bulk of it is standard Mahayana foundation teachings.
That depends on what you prefer to label "Vajrayana". Actually "Vajrayana" is a view that pervades the rest. If you refer to "Vajrayana" solely in the sense of methods classically labelled as "Varjrayana practice" then you may be right. But the impression you then get is misleading.
My Tibetan teacher, Lama Chime Rinpoche, characterized it so, and that is good enough for me.
Because it supports your view of Mahayana in the first place, right? But this may be caused by "Vajrayana" view being acctually the view you can pin down as deviant very easily which may not be the case if you referred to classical Indian sutra Mahayana which actually teaches methods not differing from those in the Pali canon except the words and terminology applied may be different.
I have not said anything, not a thing, about the Vajrayana being deviant or otherwise.
>> 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
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by ground »

tiltbillings wrote:My Tibetan teacher, Lama Chime Rinpoche, characterized it so, and that is good enough for me.
QED.
But with that I do not assert that he was wrong. I simply say that a Vajrayana teacher of course holds Vajrayana view.
tiltbillings wrote:I have not said anything, not a thing, about the Vajrayana being deviant or otherwise.
Okay. But then let me add that of course Vajrayana is not deviant as to Mahayana. Why? Because it is a branch of Mahayana. But it is neither "the Mahayana" nor "classical Indian Mahayana".


Kind regards
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

TMingyur wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:My Tibetan teacher, Lama Chime Rinpoche, characterized it so, and that is good enough for me.
QED.
But with that I do not assert that he was wrong. I simply say that a Vajrayana teacher of course holds Vajrayana view.
tiltbillings wrote:I have not said anything, not a thing, about the Vajrayana being deviant or otherwise.
Okay. But then let me add that of course Vajrayana is not deviant as to Mahayana. Why? Because it is a branch of Mahayana. But it is neither "the Mahayana" nor "classical Indian Mahayana".


Kind regards
Opinions vary. I happen to like mine, in the context of having studied Indian Buddhist history, better than I like yours, since I have no need to filter it through any particular point of view.
>> 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
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by ground »

Now to be honest ... after all that I am ending up with the question: Is it possible to "understand" Mahayana without Vajrayana?

And to be even more honest: Since I am very biased and conditioned I am answering my own question with "No". ;)

Kind regards
Sanghamitta
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by Sanghamitta »

BlackBird wrote:
Wizard in the Forest wrote:I have heard there's a difference on how emptiness is taught too, but I don't know how. I mentioned the Bodhisattva ideal.
According to Lama Ridzin Choepal, a monk I met in Sri Lanka: The Mahayana, especially the Vajrayana have a different conception of anatta than Theravada which is objectively more far reaching. In essence things (phenomena) are not as they appear to be, a common theme in all mystical religions. While Theravada confines anatta to the self, the Mahayana extends it to all phenomena so that while the Arahant may understand anatta in relation to the self, he does not understand the emptiness of all phenomena that the Bodhisattva does. Furthermore the Arahant still has a subtle self-view, and thus he will eventually take rebirth which will put him on the Bodhisattva path.
My husband was a Vajrayana student for a long period and that view of Lama Choepels corresponds exactly precisely to the view of the Theravada that he received from a number of teachers. It is the mainstream view of the Theravada among the Vajrayana . The Vajrayana is equally er....."challenging" about Zen btw. Meanwhile over on Zen Forum International Gregory Wonderwheel will be pleased to traduce the Theravada for you given the opportunity. The myth of Pan Buddhist ecumenicism is just that. Its a nice idea that only exists in the imaginations of some well meaning moderns and on Buddhist conference platforms. And that is not a negative thing.

Ajahn Chah was frequently coruscating in his expressed views of the Mahayana.....they leave those bits out of the books... ;)
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
Locked