Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Mahayana, Vajrayana, Theravada - where do you sit with these schools? And why?
anataman
Who needs a title?Where am I? Veteran
I am interested to know if and why any of you choose to align yourself with one particular school of Bhuddhism?
Is there any particular insight or practice that one school offers over another that sits with your understanding or being.
I am aligned with the Mahayana tradition, simply because the pranaparamita sutra demonstrates itself to me as that which it is: the perfection of transcendent wisdom.
Gaté,
gaté,
paragaté,
parasamgaté.
Bodhi!
Svaha!
http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/heartsutra.html
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/heartstr.htm
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/heart_s2.pdf
And as we all have buddha nature, to become a boddhisattva and achieve enlightenment for each and everyone of us is compassion, virtue and wisdom perfected.
What is it that inspires you to follow a particular tradition and why?
Is there any particular insight or practice that one school offers over another that sits with your understanding or being.
I am aligned with the Mahayana tradition, simply because the pranaparamita sutra demonstrates itself to me as that which it is: the perfection of transcendent wisdom.
Gaté,
gaté,
paragaté,
parasamgaté.
Bodhi!
Svaha!
http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/heartsutra.html
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/heartstr.htm
http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/heart_s2.pdf
And as we all have buddha nature, to become a boddhisattva and achieve enlightenment for each and everyone of us is compassion, virtue and wisdom perfected.
What is it that inspires you to follow a particular tradition and why?
3
Comments
Without even 'trying' to think about it....after the first
line...my mouth began to chant and I could hear the
drum in the background of my ears....
*ding...ding.....ding*
OM-MA-NI-PAD-ME-HUM
So, no deep, searching, profound reasoning. Just where the path led.
TADYATHA OM BWA HA HA HA HO SOHA
PS: Almost forgot. Theraveda makes be break out in hives.
I love the simplicity and verifiability of the teachings. I also was attracted to the lesser dependance(cause they still exist) on mantras, rights and rituals and supernatural stuff.
I feel like ive been a theravadan my whole life, and finding it felt like "coming home". Its the first system of practice that fits nearly perfect with my world view.
The Tibetans got the level of engagement right-- they are hard core.
The Chinese Mahayana got ethics right, especially with respects behavior towards non-human.
Zen, Chan got meditation right, but so did Vispisanna in Therevada
Contemporary Nichiren/SGI got diversity right, and they did this in the context of society generally still not known for being accepting of diversity.
Nobody got woman's issues right. Mahayana and Vajrayana got it less wrong.
I used to think that Therevada was less wrong with respect the role of mythology-- now I think they are all have fantastic cosmologies, supernatural elements, syncretism with non-Buddhist/non-Dharmic religions that have to be rationalized, subtracted, ignored, reworked, etc.
Mahayana vows often are more interesting or pragmatic than the Therevada/Tibettan vinaya as a starting point for lay practice.
And then I found my guru in a Tibetan Mahayana sangha. It is very meaningful to me and supports my meditation practice. I feel it is cutting the shoots of suffering at their source.
Although....
I once had a jacket emblazoned on the back with "Zazen Rules" since Zazen rules was the title of some instructions from Dogen on how to sit that we often recited.
I do remember being asked once on the street by someone flying gang colors if I was Zazen. I was more careful with my answer then!
I suppose, unless there is a Buddhist version of a Universalist Church like there is in Christianity, when I commit to study under a teacher, I'll take up much more of a particular tradition. For now, it feels right to absorb as much as I can wherever it's to be found.
By the way, IS there a non-demoninational Buddhist tradition? Or would that function be served by the secular Buddhists?
Gassho
These Unitarians welcome Buddhists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitarian_Universalist_Association
I was thrown out of YinYana Buddhism for starting it, no one is allowed to join.
http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=10289
http://yinyana.tumblr.com/page/4
Perhaps I might deliberately bump into you one day whilst on my bike opposite the peace pagoda in battersea park. I am sure you will be easy to recognise - the one with the lob-sided attitude!
I'll give you a good ticking off for not watching where you're going, and 'snap' you with my apple. You'll probably mutter something I don't understand and then we'll just cycle off in different directions.
Triratna ( ex-FWBO ) might be a candidate for a "non-denominational" tradition, since it draws together teachings and practices from a range of traditions - or maybe "pan-Buddhist" would be a better description?
He is a Zen monk who many align with Mahayana although he uses mostly Theravada suttas.
It's called being non-sectarian.
The reason for this post is not to ignite the sectarian/non-sectarian debate, it is about finding out what in the 3 main schools people find inspirational.
I think most buddhists these days have so much information to hand that they can work with different teachings from different schools, but may find one school in particular suits their personality and is helpful to bring insight and which enables them to see the wisdom of buddhism.
Thich Nhat Hanhs style of Zen suits me best but it is by its nature, non-sectarian. The Dalai Lama also often advises non-sectarianism but I have yet to see Thich Nhat Hanh say something that doesn't feel right and so I feel most at home with his teachings.
Also, the three main schools are many more than that as they each have been split often.
I agree with you @ourself about Thich Nath Hahn. I read a page or two regularly of his book 'The Long Road Turns To Joy'
This is what I read today - enjoy:
Smile Like a Buddha p.10
As you make the effort to let go of your worries and anxieties, please smile. It may be just the beginning of a smile, but keep it there on your lips. It is very much like the buddha's half smile. As you learn to walk as the buddha walked, you can smile as he smiled. Why wait until you are completely transformed, completely awakened? You can start being a part-time buddha right now!
The half smile is the fruit of your awareness that you are here alive, walking. At the same time, it nurtures more peace and joy within you. Smiling as you practice walking meditation will keep your steps calm and peaceful, and give you a deep sense of ease. A smile refreshes your whole being and strengthens your practice. Don't be afraid to smile.
All Mahayana traditions use the Pali. It's used in both Hinayana and Mahayana teaching. The influence of those scriptures even extends to Vajrayana.
Theraveda has no exclusive claim to those scriptures. We shouldn't refer to them as Theraveda.
Theravada likely wasn't.a thing until after there was a split in the Sangha.
Mahayana has strong east asian influences.
Vajrayana has evolved to cater to tibetan culture.
Albert Einstein
Hobby of mine.
By observing something you affect it.
Isn't it amazing to think, that a human observer - something so insignificant on the scale of the universe - by observing itself has an effect when it observes itself. Quantum physics gives us free will. Hallelujah we can change ourselves. But we then have to take on board the observer, if they are skillfully observing themselves they can do good; if they are unskillfully doing so they may do bad.
But that is just me using the best current theory and applying it to Buddhism.
Heisenberg fortunately came
up with the principle of uncertainty which has given rise to this forum
BTW
Mettha
All the Theravedins do is teach from the Pali, just like other schools do.
The "split" in the sangha occurred long before Theraveda existed. It's simply the product of cultural evolution in SE Asia. Hardly a "split".
My Guru, who's a Kagyu & Nyingma lineage holder, insists that his students be versed in topics such as 4NT, 8FP, Nidanas, etc (all found in the Pali) before they commence Mahayana study and practice.
However, our's is a practice lineage and so we don't place the premium study that the Theravedins seem to.
An approach for every folk.
Dang, that was supposed to rhyme. Well, you're preaching to the choir here... There are a couple of communities or groups I like to meditate or chat with but the universe is my Sangha...
The Sangha couldn't be split if we tried in my honest opinion.
Chogyam Trungpa adapted all sorts of influences to create what we call Shambhala, but it's still firmly rooted in Kagyu and Nyingma - hardly non-denominational. In fact there's a ton of crossover in Tibetan lineages. Just because a Kagyu teacher offers Dzogchen from Nyingma teaching doesn't make what he's doing non-denominational.
Personally I don't think non-denominational Buddhism exists.
Mahayana doesn't add anything to the Pali, either. Nobody takes Mahayana suttras and try to pass it off as part of the Pali Canon.
Mahayana teaching are distinctly different from the teaching found in the Pali, although the Mahayana is said to build on a foundation set in the Pali Canon.
I guess you could say that Mahayana adds to the corpus of Buddhist teaching by way of the teachings of Nargarjuna and Asanga, but it could be turn back by saying the Theraveda rejects those teaching.
Who's right?
Who's wrong?
It's always a matter of opinion and not fact.
I would ask, more authentic than what?
Yeah. Nice try, though! Oh, but it can be and most of the split you see is on forums like this one.
Out in the real world, most of the mundane issues we argue endlessly simply don't exist in any appreciable degree. People are too busy practicing with and learning from their teachers to concern themselves with what the most "authentic" form of Buddhism is, or what kind of bastards use words like Hinayana, or who eats what for dinner.
Online communities are sharply divided. There's a Dzogchen board that rose out of a sense of bad feelings on a more broad-based Mahayana board which was created as separate from a Theraveda board owned by the same people. You have boards bannin g other traditions like NKT and Soto. People dis groups like SGI. Taken as a whole, much of the online Buddhist community is hopelessly fractured and this bodes ill for real-world sangha because newbie see what's happening on line and think that all Buddhism is like this.
The sooner one can leave such baggage behind you, the lighter your heart and each new step can be.
a reincarnated god-king?
of course having lost his country to china, he is now a celebrity
speaker and humanitarian touring the world.
how does that square with buddhist philosophy?
I came to Buddhism interested primarily in Mahayana due to the Bodhisattva Vow and Heart Sutra (as well as for the reasons mentioned above re: Zen/Chan), but the more I read suttas and writings by Theravadan teachers, the more I find myself drawn to that tradition.
I've never been interested in Vajrayana or any of the esoteric schools for various reasons.
Your mistake is assuming Vajrayana evolved for "Tibetan culture."
It would be a logical mistake to say there is a sect that is non-sectarian. It is more like a movement or practice that anyone in any sect/lineage can claim.yes, TNH was ordained in Veitnamese Zen but he is non-sectarian by his definition. The other schools obviously. Like I said, it isn't my view but it has been raised in this thread by another poster. In reality there is only one group and in Buddhism there can only be one Sangha. Nobody shares the exact same view as anyone else so in effect, there could be as many splits in the Sangha as there are Buddhists.
Because we see things differently, some will gravitate to some teachings more than others. That's just the nature of being unique.
There may be many schools of Buddhist thought but there is only one Sangha.
The quarrels between certain members of certain sects is irrelevant and only goes to show the disease of us and "them" is alive and well even within some Buddhists.
It may confuse some but the wise will take the lesson well.