Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

What I'd really like to know is, are there specific Mahayana concepts that anyone here rejected? If so, why?
Web searches have resulted in "there isn't really a big difference" articles, but surely there must be.
Thanks!

alan wrote:What I'd really like to know is, are there specific Mahayana concepts that anyone here rejected? If so, why?
Web searches have resulted in "there isn't really a big difference" articles, but surely there must be.
Thanks!

because I prefer Theravada! the mahayana texts didn't ring true for me, simple.

Yes Manapa I feel the same way. But I'm trying to clarify my thoughts on this .
I could put out specific things that don't ring true to me but thought I'd solicit views of the wise elders of Dhammawheel.

Well I'm certainly no wise elder... but I'll answer anyway.

I didn't specifically look for a tradition based on things I rejected, rather when I read about Theravada Buddhism it all seemed to sit very well with me.

alan wrote:Yes Manapa I feel the same way. But I'm trying to clarify my thoughts on this .
I could put out specific things that don't ring true to me but thought I'd solicit views of the wise elders of Dhammawheel.

There's a huge difference. I think most people, in all likelihood, choose theravada because it speaks to them, they can identify with it, which is something that doesn't happen with the mahayana or vajrayana schools. I've slowly been moving backwards through time. My first exposure to buddhism was of a very generic sort, and being in the west, that was mostly infused with zen and tibetan. Then when I started studying and practicing, I aligned with theravada. These days I'm not even that comfortable describing myself as theravadin.

The suttas in the Pali Canon are as close as we currently have to what the historical Buddha actually spoke, so I chose to pursue the tradition that practices in accordance with those suttas and not the much later sutras. I don't know if the sutras are apocryphal or not and I don't care to get into that debate -- I have confidence that the suttas are as authentic as possible 2500 years later.

I chose Thervada because its less religious than Mahayana, thats not a cricism - just that for me personally I can do without that stuff.

There is alot less cringe worthy stuff for me in Theravada (I'm speaking for myself here). To me Theravada is Buddhism without too much baggage, it seems to make sense and agree with my reasoning so thats why I chose it.

Are there any specific Mahayana concepts you all have rejected? If so, why?

I'm just going to assume everyone goes through the process of distilling the different versions and has a valid reason for making the choice.
(Note: Reason. Not emotional response or feeling).
Thanks for helping!

Personal contact.

Wandered into my local Wat, met calm and happy monks and lay people so I stuck around. I didn't have any real understanding about the different types of Buddhism until much later, so there was absolutely no "intellectual decision" or comparing of options in my case.

Metta
Mike

alan wrote:Are there any specific Mahayana concepts you all have rejected? If so, why?

Well for me it was the whole Bodhisattva thing, don't get me wrong it is a humble and compassionate vow to make, but personally I couldn't but my faith into this, I don't even know for sure whether or not there is such a thing as rebirth, so I couldn't really put much faith into this concept.

Also I am slightly put off by all the invocation of deities and Bodhisattvas etc, that just seemed too much like religious hocus pocus and it doesn't sit easily with me.

I have a great respect for the Mahayana tradition, its just not for me. Horses for courses and all that.

Thanks Mike. I wish it could be that easy for me.
I don't have a local Wat, and even if I did the rational part of my brain would still ask:

Why choose this instead of that?

alan wrote:Are there any specific Mahayana concepts you all have rejected? If so, why?

I'm not crazy about the idea of empowerments and some of the other esoteric practices of Vajrayana, Shingon, etc. The Buddha in the Pali Canon seems pretty intent on making the whole of the Dhamma available to all who seek it. I probably don't understand these esoteric practices, but they seem inconsistent with what the Buddha taught, so I have no real desire to pursue them.

Tex wrote:

alan wrote:Are there any specific Mahayana concepts you all have rejected? If so, why?

I'm not crazy about the idea of empowerments and some of the other esoteric practices of Vajrayana, Shingon, etc.

They are effective skillful means.

I am far from any Buddhist center, so the large number of Suttas, article, and books on Theravada found online
swayed me toward Theravada. In addition to that was the emphasis Tibetan Buddhism placed on the
teacher-student relationship. Basically it seemed that I could not expect any benefits from Buddhism unless
I moved and took up with a teacher; to do less would be a waste of time (so I understood at the time).

Theravada hasn't got a bunch of visualization tech, or rituals, nor does it have demigods or deity worship(?) so
it appealed to my rebellious nature (having grown up in a pseudo-chrisitian family).

Those are the main reasons.