Why did you choose Theravada?

[Mawkish1983]

Thought I might encounter some wise people here; perhaps I was mistaken...

More expectation? More dukkha.

You asked, we answered, you didn't read the answer that satisfied your expectations so you kept asking.

If you feel we have behaved inappropriately, I sincerely apologise. Importantly, we have answered .

[mikenz66]

Hi Alan,

I ask a honest question and get no reply. I press further and then my motivation is called out. This is all very discouraging.
If you can't answer the question then please just say so.
Thought I might encounter some wise people here; perhaps I was mistaken...
Goodnight.

Strange. I thought gave an extremely direct answer. I follow Theravada because I wanted to be calm and happy like the Theravada monks and lay people that I met. For me it's not a matter of examining and rejecting other forms of Buddhism. I just didn't see the need to worry about them. I just stuck with what seemed to work, with teachers who I had confidence in.

I try to always keep this Sutta in mind when discussing other approaches: MN 95 Canki Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.'

The rest of the Sutta is similar to my experience:

"There is the case, Bharadvaja, where a monk lives in dependence on a certain village or town. Then a householder or householder's son goes to him and observes him with regard to three mental qualities — qualities based on greed, qualities based on aversion, qualities based on delusion: 'Are there in this venerable one any such qualities based on greed that, with his mind overcome by these qualities, he might say, "I know," while not knowing, or say, "I see," while not seeing; or that he might urge another to act in a way that was for his/her long-term harm & pain?' As he observes him, he comes to know, 'There are in this venerable one no such qualities based on greed... His bodily behavior & verbal behavior are those of one not greedy. And the Dhamma he teaches is deep, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. This Dhamma can't easily be taught by a person who's greedy.

When, on observing that the monk is purified with regard to qualities based on greed, he next observes him with regard to qualities based on aversion...

When, on observing that the monk is purified with regard to qualities based on aversion, he next observes him with regard to qualities based on delusion...

When, on observing that the monk is purified with regard to qualities based on delusion, he places conviction in him. With the arising of conviction, he visits him & grows close to him. Growing close to him, he lends ear. Lending ear, he hears the Dhamma. Hearing the Dhamma, he remembers it.

Of course I can't say that I've finished this bit yet...

Remembering it, he penetrates the meaning of those dhammas. Penetrating the meaning, he comes to an agreement through pondering those dhammas. There being an agreement through pondering those dhammas, desire arises. With the arising of desire, he becomes willing. Willing, he contemplates (lit: "weighs," "compares"). Contemplating, he makes an exertion. Exerting himself, he both realizes the ultimate meaning of the truth with his body and sees by penetrating it with discernment.
...

[Cittasanto]

I ask a honest question and get no reply. I press further and then my motivation is called out. This is all very discouraging.
If you can't answer the question then please just say so.
Thought I might encounter some wise people here; perhaps I was mistaken...
Goodnight.

you were answered!

you were the one who called others wise elders, and I don't remember calling or seeing your motivation being questioned, although it is an impression which can be gotten from your posts which was expressed, but have a read SN 7.2 I quoted it earlier.

if you want to talk about something specific it is best to start a thread on that specific.

[Laurens]

I ask a honest question and get no reply. I press further and then my motivation is called out. This is all very discouraging.
If you can't answer the question then please just say so.
Thought I might encounter some wise people here; perhaps I was mistaken...
Goodnight.

Firstly you got a whole page of answers - perhaps you need to give a more specific question if people aren't answering in the way you would like?

Also I don't think its very kind to imply that the people who kindly replied to your question are unwise.

Goodnight Alan.

[Monkey Mind]

I agree with what Black Bird said, nice summary.

For the Theravada, Buddha is the ultimate voice. Any enlightened being who came after him might have helped explain an old analogy in a new way, but at the end of the day it is still Buddha's teaching. In the Mahayana, some of the enlightened teachers who have followed in Buddha's footsteps are considered to be as prominent as Lord Buddha. To me, many of those teachings seemed difficult to digest.

[cooran]

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!

Hello alan,

Many of us are fairly at ease with Mahayana and Vajrayana and Dzogchen. Many of us understand, after some study, that there are just "different horses for different courses".

Many of us have studied and practiced in other Traditions - but found our Heart's Home in Theravada ~ prefering the 'paired-down' teachings of Theravada, but we do not denigrate the more ornate and decorated teachings in some other Traditions.

Once you look into the teachings and practices closely, there seems very little difference.

metta
Chris

[Cafael Dust]

First I want to say that there are fine Mahayana writings by people who know what they're talking about,

but I'm not so centred in that tradition because of things like this:

"At that time, the Buddha Sun-Moon-Lamp Brightness spoke a Great Vehicle Sutra named The Limitless Principles, a Dharma for instructing Bodhisattvas of which the Buddhas are protective and mindful. When he had finished speaking that Sutra, he then, in the midst of the assembly, sat in full lotus and entered the Samadhi of the Station of Limitless Principles; his body and mind were unmoving. Then from the heavens there fell a rain of Mandarava flowers, Mahamandarava flowers, Manjushaka flowers, and Mahamanjushaks flowers, which were scattered upon the Buddha and the entire great assembly. All the Buddha universes quaked in six ways. At that time the entire great assembly of Bhikshus, Bhikshunis, Upasakas, Upasikas, gods, dragons, Yakshas, Gandharvas, Asuras, Garudas, Kinnaras, Mahoragas, beings human and non-human as well as the minor kings and the wheel-turning sage kings and so forth, all attained what they had never had before. The rejoiced and joined their palms and, with one heart, gazed upon the Buddha. Then the Thus Come One emitted from between his brows a white hair-mark light which illumined eighteen thousand Buddha-worlds to the east, omitting none of them. Just like all the Buddha lands now seen."

...

"Following the Buddha�s crossing over into extinction, the Bodhisattva Wondrous Light upheld the Wonderful Dharma Lotus Flower Sutra for a full eighty small aeons, expounding it to others. The eight sons of the Buddha Sun-Moon-Lamp Brightness all served Wondrous Light as their master.. Wondrous Light taught and transformed them, causing them to become firmly established in Anuttarasamyaksambodhi."

...

The light illumined to the east
Eighteen thousand Buddha lands,
Revealing the places of living beings�
Karmic retributions of birth and death.
Seen, too, were Buddha lands adorned
With a multitude of gems,
The color of lapiz lazuli and crystal,
Illumined by the Buddha�s light.
Seen as well were gods and people,
Dragons, spirits, and Yaksha Hordes,
Gandharvas and Kinnaras,
Each making offering to the Buddha.

Thus come ones, too, all were seen
As they naturally accomplished the Buddha Way,
Their bodies� hue like mountains of gold,
Upright, serene, subtle, and fine,
As, within pure lapis lazuli
Would appear an image of real gold.
The World Honored Ones in those assemblies
Proclaimed the profound principle of the Law.

http://www.buddhistdoor.com/oldweb/reso ... lotus1.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Lotus Sutra uses the forms and images associated with Buddhism e.g. lotus position, expedient means and so on, but I get the impression from what I've read of the sutra that the writer or writers doesn't actually understand what Buddha was talking about in the Pali scriptures, what lies beneath the archetypes of Buddhism. Because the sutra seems to be written in order to impress people with the vast scale and glitteriness of the imagery. But all that glitters...

[seanpdx]

I ask a honest question and get no reply. I press further and then my motivation is called out. This is all very discouraging.
If you can't answer the question then please just say so.
Thought I might encounter some wise people here; perhaps I was mistaken...
Goodnight.

Oddly enough, people got discouraged when the Buddha refused to answer inconsequential questions, too.

[Dan74]

I guess people have already said this, but I will say it again - people tend to stick with a particular school of Buddhism because it works for them.

If you are hungry, you find a place to eat that looks OK and if when you eat there it is still OK, you return. Bad analogy, but with Dhamma/Dharma it is even more so, because "the food" gets better with time!

_/|\_

[notself]

Oh, I'm a having such a hard time trying to understand this. Will you please explain?
What is a convert, how does it apply to this discussion, and why would most people not put much thought into such an important decision?
Thanks!

What is so important about the decision to pick a tradition? They are all based on the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path. Everyone should be concentrating on understanding those two (12?) things. Everything else is semantics and ceremonies. I picked Theravada because I wanted to start with the oldest tradition available. I figured that it would have the least cultural add on. I find the Tipitaka challenging enough without having to deal with deities, ceremonies, rituals, and other bells and whistles. I had quite enough of that as a child raised in the Catholic Church.

Let me reverse the question. Alan, why are you not practicing Theravada?

[pink_trike]

All the Buddhist traditions are teaching exactly the same thing - with different form. Form is emptiness...

[Reductor]

Let me reverse the question. Alan, why are you not practicing Theravada?

Hear hear!

This is a Theravada forum and you seem to have two possible motives:
a) you really wish to know,
b) you wish to look down your nose at the tradition and its practitioners.

So,

What is it, exactly, that you [agree] with about the Mahayana view?
Exactly. Specifically. In plain English. Without an emotional focus.

Thanks, I'm looking forward to your reasonable, sensible and logical response.

[pink_trike]

The Lotus Sutra uses the forms and images associated with Buddhism e.g. lotus position, expedient means and so on, but I get the impression from what I've read of the sutra that the writer or writers doesn't actually understand what Buddha was talking about in the Pali scriptures, what lies beneath the archetypes of Buddhism. Because the sutra seems to be written in order to impress people with the vast scale and glitteriness of the imagery. But all that glitters...

I"m curious...how long did you study the Lotus Sutra, the culture milieu that it came forth from, and the culture's unique use of language, written structure, mythology, allegory, and conceptual ritual? I'm guessing you've studied the Pali scriptures quite awhile to actually understand what the Buddha was talking about, and to know what lies beneath the archetypes (?) of Buddhism, and to know that the Lotus Sutra doesn't actually understand what the Buddha is talking about.

[Ben]

Why did you choose Theravada?

I've never given it much thought - perhaps it was my kamma.

The older and more mature I get in my practice the more I respect the Mahayana and venerate sincere practitioners and teachers of all traditions. Since we started Dhamma Wheel nearly a year ago I was keen to invite my Mahayana and Vajrayana friends because:
- 1. I think its healther for DW to be open to all who have a genuine interest in Theravada regardless of affiliation rather than be an exclusive enclave for Theravadins, and
- 2. I have always believed that alternative points of view, when presented appropriately in a respectful and friendly environment, informs one's own view.
To my great delight that has been the case here at DW.
metta

Ben

[Cittasanto]

I guess people have already said this, but I will say it again - people tend to stick with a particular school of Buddhism because it works for them.

If you are hungry, you find a place to eat that looks OK and if when you eat there it is still OK, you return. Bad analogy, but with Dhamma/Dharma it is even more so, because "the food" gets better with time!

_/|\_

I quoted a sutta earlier have a read! I think your analogy is very apt!