suttametta wrote:These are some very neat little categories. You've got your Nikayism, your Mahayanism and your Vajrayanism. Nope. No isms in this list.
There's no need to unify anything. Everything is up for grabs and completely open to scrutiny and reevaluation. Just as it always has been.
This is the first time I have seen ism used with these words. However, I also do not see a problem with the use of an abstract nouns indicating specific doctrine considering the dhamma uses conventional language and categorisation to express truth and make it easier to understand. several positions maybe correct but to say these positions are all the same is like saying wood and clay are the same.
The teachings and practices, as always, are for practice not separation, different opinions can inform each other or not. ism isn't at fault unless you want to imply sectarianism instead of respectful coexistence.
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