Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by Ben »

Dan74 wrote:Shshshsh!
ban copy.gif
What a great idea!
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
whynotme
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by whynotme »

Hell, some people are like this:

When the teacher said: let do this, it will bring you succeed. I tried many thing and only this leads to succeed
Students: no, sir, what you said isn't true, we love to follow all the things you did before, we love have our hand broken our body and our mind broken like you did experiments before. That is the true noble way
Teacher: you know what should and what shoudn't be. Oh, in that case you should be the teacher and I will be your student :rolleye:

By that logic, you all shouldn't using PC or internet, you should build your IC yourselves, build the car yourselves, maybe you should even wait for another apple falling on your head, maybe by that you can re invent all the wheels you need in life :tongue:

Regards
Please stop following me
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by Dan74 »

suttametta wrote:It's something like trying to find the commonalities between science and astrology.
I find this a very ill-informed analogy.

For starters life is not science. Practice is not science. If one approaches life and practice in the same way one approaches science, one would end up an emasculated rump of a being, inauthentic and grotesque.

Mahayana practice that I have known is not like astrology. That is offensive and untrue. Rather it has been a wise and patient guide illuminating aspects of my life that had remained obscured, until the entire view is changed. It has been an inspiration to press on and revive practice even as old habits seem to gain an upper hand. It has been a relationship with reality that has become more and more intimate, just as one falls out of love with oneself and discovers the world. It has filled my heart with gratitude at the best of times and with shame that I fail to do justice to this path, at the worst. It has been neither about reifying self, nor reaching out for bliss or brahman, as you described, but about discovering what this is. And shedding all it is not.

And as for whynotme is describing, I can only shrug and say this has nothing to do with the Mahayana practice that have been taught.
Last edited by Dan74 on Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
_/|\_
santa100
Posts: 6814
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:55 pm

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by santa100 »

Whynotme wrote:
"Mahayana and vajrayana are some other monks' teaching, no more, no less"
Then basically you are saying that Mahayana and Vajrayana do not practice the 3 characteristics, 4 NT, 8 NP, and 12 DO. I simply disagree..
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by cooran »

Hello all,

This might be of interest:

Theravada - Mahayana Buddhism by Ven. Dr. W. Rahula

EXCERPT:
Mahayana and Theravada
Now, what is the difference between Mahayana and Theravada?


I have studied Mahayana for many years and the more I study it, the more I find there is hardly any difference between Theravada and Mahayana with regard to the fundamental teachings.

- Both accept Sakyamuni Buddha as the Teacher.
- The Four Noble Truths are exactly the same in both schools.
- The Eightfold Path is exactly the same in both schools.
- The Paticca-samuppada or the Dependent Origination is the same in both schools.
- Both rejected the idea of a supreme being who created and governed this world.
- Both accept Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta and Sila, Samadhi, Panna without any difference.

These are the most important teachings of the Buddha and they are all accepted by both schools without question.

There are also some points where they differ. An obvious one is the Bodhisattva ideal. Many people say that Mahayana is for the Bodhisattvahood which leads to Buddhahood while Theravada is for Arahantship. I must point out that the Buddha was also an Arahant. Pacceka Buddha is also an Arahant. A disciple can also be an Arahant. The Mahayana texts never use the term Arahant-yana, Arahant Vehicle. They used three terms: Bodhisattvayana, Prateka-Buddhayana, and Sravakayana. In the Theravada tradition these three are called Bodhis.
Some people imagine that Theravada is selfish because it teaches that people should seek their own salvation. But how can a selfish person gain Enlightenment? Both schools accept the three Yanas or Bodhis but consider the Bodhisattva ideal as the highest. The Mahayana has created many mystical Bodhisattvas while the Theravada considers a Bodhisattva as a man amongst us who devotes his entire life for the attainment of perfection, ultimately becoming a fully Enlightened Buddha for the welfare of the world, for the happiness of the world.
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha125.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by daverupa »

Mahayana requires tathāgatagarbha, wholly foreign to the Theravada milieu.

Some Mahayana requires Bardo, also wholly foreign to the Theravada milieu (which rejects antarābhava altogether).

Mahayana employs a heavily-developed trikaya model, wholly undeveloped in Theravada.

---

These facts will mean different things for different people.
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by ground »

Vlcimba wrote:Let's forget about the differences shall we :)? Just to be simple, I think they share rather similar goals and of course their teacher: the Buddha.
It is not that they (the teachings) would share goals but the people clinging to those teachings share a common goal: To overcome the dilemma of being alive as a human.

Kind regards
User avatar
Enlightenment0106
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:28 am

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by Enlightenment0106 »

ground wrote:
Vlcimba wrote:Let's forget about the differences shall we :)? Just to be simple, I think they share rather similar goals and of course their teacher: the Buddha.
It is not that they (the teachings) would share goals but the people clinging to those teachings share a common goal: To overcome the dilemma of being alive as a human.

Kind regards

Or rather out of the samsara. "human" is just another realm. Not reborn as a human doesn't mean you are out of the samsara. You maybe in better realms like devas and asuras. The best way of putting it, I guess , is to Attain enlightenment and seek liberation( or nirvana ).
Form is emptiness. Emptiness is form--- Heart sutra
suttametta
Posts: 289
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 2:55 pm

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by suttametta »

Dan74 wrote:
suttametta wrote:It's something like trying to find the commonalities between science and astrology.
I find this a very ill-informed analogy.

For starters life is not science. Practice is not science. If one approaches life and practice in the same way one approaches science, one would end up an emasculated rump of a being, inauthentic and grotesque.

Mahayana practice that I have known is not like astrology. That is offensive and untrue. Rather it has been a wise and patient guide illuminating aspects of my life that had remained obscured, until the entire view is changed. It has been an inspiration to press on and revive practice even as old habits seem to gain an upper hand. It has been a relationship with reality that has become more and more intimate, just as one falls out of love with oneself and discovers the world. It has filled my heart with gratitude at the best of times and with shame that I fail to do justice to this path, at the worst. It has been neither about reifying self, nor reaching out for bliss or brahman, as you described, but about discovering what this is. And shedding all it is not.

And as for whynotme is describing, I can only shrug and say this has nothing to do with the Mahayana practice that have been taught.
I understand where you are coming from. It's my opinion. The Pali framework is scientific in my view. I feel the Mahayana invokes psychobabble and pseudoscience to covert its syncretization with Vedism.
whynotme
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by whynotme »

santa100 wrote:
Whynotme wrote:
"Mahayana and vajrayana are some other monks' teaching, no more, no less"
Then basically you are saying that Mahayana and Vajrayana do not practice the 3 characteristics, 4 NT, 8 NP, and 12 DO. I simply disagree..
Dear santa100,

Yes, we as individuals have the right to agree or to disagree, it isn't a big deal

It seems you lack basics understanding of normal language when it comes to faith. By saying commentary is monks' teaching, I don't simply reject them all as false, some may be right, some may be false. Similar to Mahayanan is monks' view, not buddha, it is monk view doesn't mean all of it is false. Use your logic, is that the right thinking?

You seem to be more concerned on the name or the label, 4 nt, 8np, 3 characteristics. It is just a name, the label. If someone says he practices 8np then you believe he truly does? That called naive.

If I declare myself an arahant, full with knowledge of 4 nt, 8np,.. then do you believe me?

If mahayana says it practices 8np, then you will believe it is true, coz it says so? It practices 8np when it says there is a path more noble than 8np? OK, that is your right, you have all rights to believe what you want and I don't want to discuss about faith without reason. Again, it is not a big deal, we are just buddhists, come in peace, not coming for confrontation.

Regards
Please stop following me
whynotme
Posts: 743
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 5:52 am

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by whynotme »

Dan74 wrote: And as for whynotme is describing, I can only shrug and say this has nothing to do with the Mahayana practice that have been taught.
Dear Dan74

I know you came from zen, and I myself came from zen too, also I know some other mahayana traditions as well.

As for your state: this has nothing to do with the mahayana practice that have been taught, would you care to point out which one is wrong? It may make thing clearer

Regards
Please stop following me
Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by Nyana »

Dan74 wrote:
suttametta wrote:It's something like trying to find the commonalities between science and astrology.
I find this a very ill-informed analogy.
Indeed.
Dan74 wrote:And as for whynotme is describing, I can only shrug and say this has nothing to do with the Mahayana practice that have been taught.
Me either.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by tiltbillings »

In this and in the other thread, I am waiting for those less than thrilled with what is called the Mahayana to show some actual understanding of the history of the collection of schools/movements as well as the various teachings generally grouped together and called the Mahayana. It has been a disappointing and tedious wait.
>> 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
manas
Posts: 2678
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 3:04 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by manas »

Vlcimba wrote:Let's forget about the differences shall we :)? Just to be simple, I think they share rather similar goals and of course their teacher: the Buddha.
Hi Vicimba,

I was wondering what inspired you to begin this thread? Because in my experience most folks here are already trying to be tolerant of others' views. Is this a reminder, maybe?

In my case, lately I have grown weary of thinking that my perception of reality is necessarily the most correct one. It seems so petty to think in this way. I'm more interested in just brightening this mind, so that somehow, between now and the day that I meet my inevitable end, I finish up wiser than when I began. As for who is right, how on earth can we be the judge? More than two and a half thousand years have passed since the Buddha passed away. I don't know how anyone can be so bold as to state that they have the 'real, true doctrine'. All of us, Theravada, Mahayana or Whatever-yana, are all going by probabilities, not certainties,.

I want to live an 'enlightened' life. I want to spread love, to heal hurt, and to live wisely. And when I meet people who embody this, whether they call themselves Theravada, Mahayana, or Joe Bloggs, matters not much; they have my respect.

Ok that's enough 'bordering on heresy' from me for one day

metta. _/I\_
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Similarities of Mahayana and theravada

Post by Dan74 »

whynotme wrote:
Dan74 wrote: And as for whynotme is describing, I can only shrug and say this has nothing to do with the Mahayana practice that have been taught.
Dear Dan74

I know you came from zen, and I myself came from zen too, also I know some other mahayana traditions as well.

As for your state: this has nothing to do with the mahayana practice that have been taught, would you care to point out which one is wrong? It may make thing clearer

Regards
Hi whynotme,

Well my experience of Zen practice is that it is very down to earth and pragmatic - it deals with the now, rather than doctrines and dogmas. For instance I would not ask my teacher about Tathagatagharba or the Bodhisattva ideal unless this was directly relevant to what I was facing in my life right now - a question from the heart rather than waxing lyrical about all these big words like we tend to do here. And if she gave a talk about it, she would relate it very much to our life/practice right now, rather than postulating something as existing, positing views or establishing positions.

My practice has also been very much about the Noble Eightfold Path and in fact my Zen teacher has given talks directly on this subject. I was taught that without living right, meditation is not going to be right - that sila is the basis for practice. Zen practice that I know is also about relating every aspect of our lives back to practice rather than going through the motions. About recognizing how we engage with various aspects of our lives, seeing where the Brahmaviharas/Paramitas are lacking and cultivating them. About being present, facing life squarely and engaging fully - giving of yourself completely to everything you do. This happens gradually as the conceit of self wears off and one naturally comes to serve others rather than gratifying imaginary needs, to act appropriately to the situation.

So I fail to see which part of this is at odds with what the Buddha taught. Sure people can find plenty to criticize within the massive Mahayana corpus, from sectarianism to atman sounding doctrines. But what relevance this actually has to many many Mahayana practitioners out there, is another question entirely.

It sounds like it was directly relevant to Paul's (suttametta) practice, but not at all to mine so far.
manas wrote:
In my case, lately I have grown weary of thinking that my perception of reality is necessarily the most correct one. It seems so petty to think in this way. I'm more interested in just brightening this mind, so that somehow, between now and the day that I meet my inevitable end, I finish up wiser than when I began. As for who is right, how on earth can we be the judge? More than two and a half thousand years have passed since the Buddha passed away. I don't know how anyone can be so bold as to state that they have the 'real, true doctrine'. All of us, Theravada, Mahayana or Whatever-yana, are all going by probabilities, not certainties,.

I want to live an 'enlightened' life. I want to spread love, to heal hurt, and to live wisely. And when I meet people who embody this, whether they call themselves Theravada, Mahayana, or Joe Bloggs, matters not much; they have my respect.
PS Couldn't agree more - too much hubris around already and I think we should all try to focus on our practice and refrain from over-reaching.
sectarianism.jpg
sectarianism.jpg (50.24 KiB) Viewed 2017 times
_/|\_
Locked