Actually, I can see where you are coming from, from a certain angle. Framing it as "a different religion" is certainly a personal opinion of yours, but they are definitely members of a different saṃgha, namely the Dharmaguptaka. Calling them "not monks" is a bit of a innovation on your part, as even in debates and sectarian polemics with Mahāyānists from India the Theravāda Venerables still acknowledged their adherence to the vinaya. They are still monks. They are just ordained under a different lineage, like the śrāvaka bhikṣuṇyaḥ ordained by the Dalai Lama. They may or may not practice Mahāyāna Buddhism.
That being said, they are subject to, and obedient to, from a legalistic view, senior Mahāyāna saṃgha members, but they are not restricted in their practice of Buddhism.
They are not part of the same saṃgha as those operational in Thailand, Sri Lanka, etc.
Theravada and Mahayana need each other
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
Malcolm, too, once said that Mahayana is a religion in its own right. I couldn't find an exact reference (but we could ask him, I suppose ...).
This is the closest I could find:
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
No of course. Schism may occur because of disagreements both in Dhamma and/or Vinaya.This is thinking that is foreign to Buddhism. Vinaya-observance is vinaya-observance. Sangha schisms occur over vinaya-observance.
Shravakas? If you mean theravadins, then these authorities may accept their ordination, but they don't consider them as a part of their own Sanghas. Just in a same way they accept ordination of catholic monks, but don't consider them as a part of their own Sanghas. No difference here.And where are these Mahāyāna authorities, nonetheless Vajrayāna ones, who reject the ordination of śrāvakāḥ?
They are different in a way, for example, how Mormons differ from Russian Orthodox Christians. Two different religions with different everything. Of course you can still say "they are both christians", but this is just sloppy label which means nothing.Framing it as "a different religion" is certainly a personal opinion of yours,
There is no such thing as "Dharmaguptaka sangha", because Dharmaguptaka has disappeared some 1000+ years ago.but they are definitely members of a different saṃgha, namely the Dharmaguptaka.
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
In relation to this point only
"Ordination is invalid" in general though, is an absurd value statement. Related to this:
The Dharmaguptaka saṅgha consists overwhelmingly mostly of Mahāyāna vinaya-observers, it endures to this day every bit as much as the various Theravāda lineages. It is as internally diverse as any saṅgha using the Pāli vinaya. It is much more historically substantiated, than for instance Dhammayuttikanikāya or Mahānikāya.
Still, they are not members of the same saṅgha as most Theravāda practitioners. They are bhikṣuṇyaḥ, however. Any opinion to the contrary is just that, a value judgement on fellow dharma practitioners practicing, of all things, the same Pāli Theravāda as yourself.
"Ordination is invalid" for participation in a traditional or older Theravāda saṅgha, like the Thai State-Saṅgha, or those out of Sri Lanka, pending some sort of invitation.Zom wrote:ordination is invalid
"Ordination is invalid" in general though, is an absurd value statement. Related to this:
Zom wrote:There is no such thing as "Dharmaguptaka sangha", because Dharmaguptaka has disappeared some 1000+ years ago.
The Dharmaguptaka saṅgha consists overwhelmingly mostly of Mahāyāna vinaya-observers, it endures to this day every bit as much as the various Theravāda lineages. It is as internally diverse as any saṅgha using the Pāli vinaya. It is much more historically substantiated, than for instance Dhammayuttikanikāya or Mahānikāya.
Still, they are not members of the same saṅgha as most Theravāda practitioners. They are bhikṣuṇyaḥ, however. Any opinion to the contrary is just that, a value judgement on fellow dharma practitioners practicing, of all things, the same Pāli Theravāda as yourself.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
For many the belief in monastic lineage is an empty ritual and they take the buddha's advise and don't indulge in it.
chownah
chownah
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
Precisely why Theravada nuns have valid ordinations IMO. Still, sectarians like to harp.
Just let monastics practice. Regardless of ordination lineage.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
I once did my own very half fast study of monastic lineage to see what the buddha said about it. He didn't say much. The only thing I could find that he had to say about lineage was in a statement he made to his father that he was no longer of his families lineage but rather he was of the lineage of noble ones.......which means sort of like he is of a lineage of attitude and doe not involve any sort of ordination at all.
You seem to be an academic type. I would be interested in hearing what you could find about the buddha's attitudes towards lineage if you are interested....maybe I missed something important....I didn't do a very throrough job and I'm really a farmer so my patience is sometimes short with academic endeavors......(lazy).....
chownah
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
Consider his words defining what a "true" Brahmin is. He basically argues that Brahmins are to be judged according to their merits, not their birth.chownah wrote: ↑Wed Feb 07, 2018 4:01 pmI once did my own very half fast study of monastic lineage to see what the buddha said about it. He didn't say much. The only thing I could find that he had to say about lineage was in a statement he made to his father that he was no longer of his families lineage but rather he was of the lineage of noble ones.......which means sort of like he is of a lineage of attitude and doe not involve any sort of ordination at all.
You seem to be an academic type. I would be interested in hearing what you could find about the buddha's attitudes towards lineage if you are interested....maybe I missed something important....I didn't do a very throrough job and I'm really a farmer so my patience is sometimes short with academic endeavors......(lazy).....
chownah
I was guess he would have similar statements about a nun's practices, a nun's observance, vs their ordination lineage.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
I'll give you a better "academic" answer, with citations and whatnot, in a few.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
-
- Posts: 2298
- Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
Thanissaro Bhikkhu refers to "Buddhist religions". That would Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana, could be considered different religions, but all Buddhist. I don't have a problem with that description. As a Thervadin, when I listen to a talk from a Mahayana, Zen, or Vajrayana teacher, I will sometimes feel very out of place because the teachings conflict with my understanding of dhamma. Then the next moment I will hear something that feels very familiar. It might permit us some sectarian discomfort if we think of Mahayana and Vajrayana as Buddhist Religions like ours, but perhaps sometimes fairly different in practice and method.
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
If we refer to early buddhist texts , you can't find any elaborative affirmative description about the state of Nibanna , whereas , the Mahayana and Zen has . The Theravada teachings emphasized merely on the path . Mahayana , Zen and Vajrayana more on the liberation description .dharmacorps wrote: ↑Fri Feb 09, 2018 1:50 am Thanissaro Bhikkhu refers to "Buddhist religions". That would Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana, could be considered different religions, but all Buddhist. I don't have a problem with that description. As a Thervadin, when I listen to a talk from a Mahayana, Zen, or Vajrayana teacher, I will sometimes feel very out of place because the teachings conflict with my understanding of dhamma. Then the next moment I will hear something that feels very familiar. It might permit us some sectarian discomfort if we think of Mahayana and Vajrayana as Buddhist Religions like ours, but perhaps sometimes fairly different in practice and method.
-
- Posts: 2298
- Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
RIght, that's a example of what I was saying-- a description of the state of nibbana which is somewhat fundamentally ineffable in the Pali Canon IS described in other Buddhist religions. Sometimes they don't even seem like the same religion because of those vast differences.James Tan wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:42 pm If we refer to early buddhist texts , you can't find any elaborative affirmative description about the state of Nibanna , whereas , the Mahayana and Zen has . The Theravada teachings emphasized merely on the path . Mahayana , Zen and Vajrayana more on the liberation description .
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
Can you elaborate? Which interpretations of nibbāna do u refer to? Abiding and non-abiding?dharmacorps wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:54 pmRIght, that's a example of what I was saying-- a description of the state of nibbana which is somewhat fundamentally ineffable in the Pali Canon IS described in other Buddhist religions. Sometimes they don't even seem like the same religion because of those vast differences.James Tan wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:42 pm If we refer to early buddhist texts , you can't find any elaborative affirmative description about the state of Nibanna , whereas , the Mahayana and Zen has . The Theravada teachings emphasized merely on the path . Mahayana , Zen and Vajrayana more on the liberation description .
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
-
- Posts: 1350
- Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am
Re: Theravada and Mahayana need each other
It seems like ineffability is common throughout all religions when talking about a transcendent reality no matter what it is called.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:42 pmCan you elaborate? Which interpretations of nibbāna do u refer to? Abiding and non-abiding?dharmacorps wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:54 pmRIght, that's a example of what I was saying-- a description of the state of nibbana which is somewhat fundamentally ineffable in the Pali Canon IS described in other Buddhist religions. Sometimes they don't even seem like the same religion because of those vast differences.James Tan wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:42 pm If we refer to early buddhist texts , you can't find any elaborative affirmative description about the state of Nibanna , whereas , the Mahayana and Zen has . The Theravada teachings emphasized merely on the path . Mahayana , Zen and Vajrayana more on the liberation description .
If we take Nagarjuna's writings as the definitive 'view' on Mahayana, does he talk about abiding or non-abiding as the descriptive for Nibbana?