The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Locked
User avatar
fig tree
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:25 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by fig tree »

Wizard in the Forest wrote:I remember there were different Parami as well, but I don't quite grasp the main specific philosophical differences there is between the two schools of thought.
Dhammapala has a discussion of different ways of dividing up the paramis here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el409.html.

Certain generalizations can be made about the differences between Theravada and Mahayana, but it seems the more one tries to be accurate about it, the more it starts to look like a little guided tour of different schools. I think maybe reading some history of Buddhism is about the best way to get acquainted with the differences. Each school really needs to be understood on its own terms, preferably without too much emphasis on the contrasts it draws between itself and others.

Fig Tree
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 »

fig tree wrote:
Wizard in the Forest wrote:I remember there were different Parami as well, but I don't quite grasp the main specific philosophical differences there is between the two schools of thought.
Dhammapala has a discussion of different ways of dividing up the paramis here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... el409.html.

Certain generalizations can be made about the differences between Theravada and Mahayana, but it seems the more one tries to be accurate about it, the more it starts to look like a little guided tour of different schools. I think maybe reading some history of Buddhism is about the best way to get acquainted with the differences. Each school really needs to be understood on its own terms, preferably without too much emphasis on the contrasts it draws between itself and others.

Fig Tree
I would agree to a point. Each school does need to be understood on its own terms without the emphasis on either dissimilarities or commonalities, In essence much of the Mahayana and Theravada represents two separate religious entities which share some common terminology.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
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: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
Depends upon how broadly and loosely you want to define Vajrayana. since Vajrayana has a fairly late introduction into Indian Buddhism, there was a lot of Mahayana going on before the Vajrayana came onto the scene. And I suspect in China/Taiwan, Korea, Vietnam and Japan there is a lot Mahayana going that has little to do with Vajrayana.
>> 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
Taco
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:23 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by Taco »

tiltbillings wrote: ..., the individual who wants to become a buddha in the Theravada must be on the verge of becoming an arahant and make the vow in front of a living Buddha and receive an acknowledgement from that Buddha about the future awakening.
I remember hearing this story about the Gotama Buddha's earlier life. If I recall he heard that the Buddha of that time and his Sangha were arriving to some town and he went to prepare the road for them. He didn't get it finalized so he lay down on the road so the Buddha and his Sangha could walk over him. And then he saw the Buddha and was so impressed that he made the bodhisattva vow and so on. Or something like that...

I have some questions about this bodhisattva vow. Are the parts about preparing the road and laying down on it also required? Or could some of the "must be on the verge of becoming an arahant and make the vow in front of a living Buddha and receive an acknowledgement from that Buddha about the future awakening" be a generalization by the commentators? I.e. this is how it happened before, so this is how it should happen always? Or is this a clear teaching of the Buddha in some sutta?

Perhaps this is explained in some previous thread or elsewhere? This is something I've wondered about before...
User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by m0rl0ck »

tiltbillings wrote:
Wizard in the Forest wrote:Tilt, maybe you have a clear understanding of the differences, so I would like to hear what you think they are if you don't mind.
I think, Alice, if you are intersted I can suggest a couple of books. 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.
According to an amazon.com review, this quote appears on the back cover of The Jewel Ornament of Liberation: "This is a masterwork of Tibetan Buddhism."

The Jewel Ornament of Liberation is probably a great source of information on vajrayana buddhism, but not mahayana. If you want a look at mahayana buddhism as its actually practiced today, get some information on chan buddhism. Chan is chinese mahayana buddhism, usually found in the wild with chinese pure land buddhism, which encourages devotional practices. By number of adherents chan is probably the biggest mahayana sect, if you want to know more about it go to http://chan1.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chan btw is the chinese precursor to japanese zen. Something was lost in the translation.


About the bodhisattva issue that everyone seems hung up on, i have seen that interpreted, in chan and zen anyway, more as a device for developing bodhicitta, since its taught that in reality there are no sentient beings to save( anatta remember? ). I think other sects may interpret it more literally, but i actually dont know that. The heart sutra and commentaries are an excellent way to understand mahayana buddhism, and there is a great audio series on the heart sutra here http://www.everydayzen.org/index.php?It ... 0emptiness" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A translation of the heart sutra in modern english (not the one i like the best but pretty accessible if you havent read it before): http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/heartsutra.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by m0rl0ck on Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:42 pm, edited 4 times in total.
“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
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 »

As Bodhicitta is not a concept recognised in the same way in the Theravada that simply begs more questions. Incidentally no one in the Theravada IS hung up on the Bodhisattva issue. In the way that it is used in the Mahayana it is a non issue.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

m0rl0ck wrote: The Jewel Ornament of Liberation is probably a great source of information on vajrayana buddhism, but not mahayana.
Have you actually read Guenther's translation? Obviuosly not. Not only will I take my Kagdyu teacher, Lama Chime Rinpoche's, word about it, I'll take Gamopoa's word. He ends the book with "This explanation of the stages in the Mahayana Path ... has been written by the doctor bSod.nams rin.chen [Gampopa] . . . ..

Here is the curriculum of the Karma Thegsum Chöling, the official Kagdyu presence in North America: http://www.kagyu.org/kagyulineage/cente ... iculum.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Please note that in the sections on the Mahayana the Jewel Ornament is listed as a resource, but that it is not listed in the Vajrayana section as a resource. While it may be argued that Mahamudra teachings stand in the background of the book, the book is, as the Dalai Lama, in the intro to the other translation, a "sutric" book. It is not a tantric/vajrayana book. It can be read and understood in terms of the systematized Mahayana that came out of India without reference to Tantra/Vajrayana.

Jewel Ornament of Liberation, this text which in Tibetan is known as the Dakpo Targyen, is the most famous one. It contains his profound words explaining the Mahayana Path. It is a manual of how to go about with one's study and practice of the Path of Mahayana. - Sangye Nyempa Rinpoche (found here: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... clnk&gl=us

I do know what I am talking about here.
>> 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: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
Depends upon how broadly and loosely you want to define Vajrayana. since Vajrayana has a fairly late introduction into Indian Buddhism, there was a lot of Mahayana going on before the Vajrayana came onto the scene. And I suspect in China/Taiwan, Korea, Vietnam and Japan there is a lot Mahayana going that has little to do with Vajrayana.
Of course.
But I was speaking from a personal perspective, not asserting at all that it "is" generally so for all types of persons.


Kind regards
User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by m0rl0ck »

tiltbillings wrote:
m0rl0ck wrote: The Jewel Ornament of Liberation is probably a great source of information on vajrayana buddhism, but not mahayana.
Have you actually read Guenther's translation? Obviuosly not. Not only will I take my Kagdyu teacher, Lama Chime Rinpoche's, word about it, I'll take Gamopoa's word. He ends the book with "This explanation of the stages in the Mahayana Path ... has been written by the doctor bSod.nams rin.chen [Gampopa] . . . ..

Here is the curriculum of the Karma Thegsum Chöling, the official Kagdyu presence in North America: http://www.kagyu.org/kagyulineage/cente ... iculum.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Please note that in the sections on the Mahayana the Jewel Ornament is listed as a resource, but that it is not listed in the Vajrayana section as a resource. While it may be argued that Mahamudra teachings stand in the background of the book, the book is, as the Dalai Lama, in the intro to the other translation, a "sutric" book. It is not a tantric/vajrayana book. It can be read and understood in terms of the systematized Mahayana that came out of India without reference to Tantra/Vajrayana.

Jewel Ornament of Liberation, this text which in Tibetan is known as the Dakpo Targyen, is the most famous one. It contains his profound words explaining the Mahayana Path. It is a manual of how to go about with one's study and practice of the Path of Mahayana. - Sangye Nyempa Rinpoche (found here: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... clnk&gl=us

I do know what I am talking about here.

Judging from the qoute attributions and the recommendations and the back cover of the book, this is a resource to be used by vajrayana buddhists to learn about mahayana buddhism. In other words mahayana as seen thru the lens of the vajrayana.
We all know how theravadan buddhism looks through a vajrayana lens from our collective experience on an other forum and if one wants to learn about mahayana buddhism, it would be best i think to look at mahayana, not vajrayana, sources.
“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
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by ground »

m0rl0ck wrote:We all know how theravadan buddhism looks through a vajrayana lens from our collective experience on an other forum ...
Please abstain from ungrounded generalisations.

Thank you.


Kind regards
User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by BlackBird »

Sanghamitta wrote: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.
Well put.
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

Path Press - Ñāṇavīra Thera Dhamma Page - Ajahn Nyanamoli's Dhamma talks
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by tiltbillings »

m0rl0ck wrote: if one wants to learn about mahayana buddhism, it would be best i think to look at mahayana, not vajrayana, sources.
And the Gampopa's JEWEL ORNAMENT OF LIBERATION does just that. It draws exclusively from the sutras and Mahayana commentarial literature. There is no unique Vjrayana twist to what one finds in this work; there is no need for it.
>> 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
Hanzze
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Cambodia

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by Hanzze »

Dear m0rl0ck,
Chan is chinese mahayana buddhism, usually found in the wild with chinese pure land buddhism, which encourages devotional practices. By number of adherents chan is probably the biggest mahayana sect, if you want to know more about it go to http://chan1.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chan btw is the chinese precursor to japanese zen. Something was lost in the translation.


About the bodhisattva issue that everyone seems hung up on, i have seen that interpreted, in chan and zen anyway, more as a device for developing bodhicitta, since its taught that in reality there are no sentient beings to save( anatta remember? ). I think other sects may interpret it more literally, but i actually dont know that. The heart sutra and commentaries are an excellent way to understand mahayana buddhism, and there is a great audio series on the heart sutra here http://www.everydayzen.org/index.php?It ... 0emptiness" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A translation of the heart sutra in modern english (not the one i like the best but pretty accessible if you havent read it before): http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/heartsutra.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I guess I do not know much about those Chan and other Mahayana schools things, but I wouldn't wonder if the practice it isn't very similar to the "Theravada" Buddho - Meditation practice.
Oh! There are so many differences... *smile*
(I wish it leads not to much off topic as we search for differences)

_/\_
with loving kindness and joy
Just that! *smile*
...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_
User avatar
m0rl0ck
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by m0rl0ck »

Hanzze wrote:Dear m0rl0ck,
Chan is chinese mahayana buddhism, usually found in the wild with chinese pure land buddhism, which encourages devotional practices. By number of adherents chan is probably the biggest mahayana sect, if you want to know more about it go to http://chan1.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chan btw is the chinese precursor to japanese zen. Something was lost in the translation.


About the bodhisattva issue that everyone seems hung up on, i have seen that interpreted, in chan and zen anyway, more as a device for developing bodhicitta, since its taught that in reality there are no sentient beings to save( anatta remember? ). I think other sects may interpret it more literally, but i actually dont know that. The heart sutra and commentaries are an excellent way to understand mahayana buddhism, and there is a great audio series on the heart sutra here http://www.everydayzen.org/index.php?It ... 0emptiness" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A translation of the heart sutra in modern english (not the one i like the best but pretty accessible if you havent read it before): http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/heartsutra.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I guess I do not know much about those Chan and other Mahayana schools things, but I wouldn't wonder if the practice it isn't very similar to the "Theravada" Buddho - Meditation practice.
Oh! There are so many differences... *smile*
(I wish it leads not to much off topic as we search for differences)

_/\_
with loving kindness and joy
I actually had to read up on buddho to answer :) Its not a method of practice i use myself, so i may be misleading you with my anwer. The pureland component often found with chan does have a practice that involves the repitition of the buddhas name that sounds pretty much like whats detailed here http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... uddho.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Sounds very much similiar. :)
“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
legolas
Posts: 235
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:58 am

Re: The specific differences between Mahayana and Theravada?

Post by legolas »

Taco wrote:
tiltbillings wrote: ..., the individual who wants to become a buddha in the Theravada must be on the verge of becoming an arahant and make the vow in front of a living Buddha and receive an acknowledgement from that Buddha about the future awakening.
I remember hearing this story about the Gotama Buddha's earlier life. If I recall he heard that the Buddha of that time and his Sangha were arriving to some town and he went to prepare the road for them. He didn't get it finalized so he lay down on the road so the Buddha and his Sangha could walk over him. And then he saw the Buddha and was so impressed that he made the bodhisattva vow and so on. Or something like that...

I have some questions about this bodhisattva vow. Are the parts about preparing the road and laying down on it also required? Or could some of the "must be on the verge of becoming an arahant and make the vow in front of a living Buddha and receive an acknowledgement from that Buddha about the future awakening" be a generalization by the commentators? I.e. this is how it happened before, so this is how it should happen always? Or is this a clear teaching of the Buddha in some sutta?

Perhaps this is explained in some previous thread or elsewhere? This is something I've wondered about before...

Hi,

Where does the above story appear? I know it is not in the suttas. The suttas/vinaya only mention the Buddha meeting a past Buddha once. In the story our Buddha meets the previous Buddha only after being literally dragged there by his hair. The text does not mention bodhisatta vows or paramis, it just explains the Buddha's first introduction to the Buddha Dhamma, which happened in this aeon. The Theravada original teachings never mention a Bodhisatta path, the only time the term Bodhisatta appears is in relation to the Buddha's last life. As far as vows are concerned in regard to other disciples, again these are never mentioned. Indeed in the present aeon, one of the Buddha's Great disciples was born as Mara because he had not met with the Dhamma at that time. So the idea of accumulating paramis over several aeons seems invalid.
I suppose the point I am making could make a new thread "Why do Theravada and Mahayana insist on fairytales" My personal view is that it is because it is much "nicer" world to face when we introduce a lot of eternalist views to make ourselves feel good.
Locked