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.
To espouse the 'hierarchy' of Hinayana, Mahayana, Vajrayana is an example of the self-cherishing notions we are advised to abandon.
this is where the Nyingma nine yana breakdown becomes quite useful.
Rather than simply lumping yana's into the three mentioned above they use a system that specifies the view, meditation, and conduct of the shravakayana, pratyekabuddhayana, bodhisattvayana, the outer tantra's of kriya, ubaya, and yoga and the inner tantras of mahayoga, anuyoga, and atiyoga.
When we can thoroughly look at the different methods of practice we can see the differences and similarities of the diverse methods of Buddhadharma and appraise where we might fit in as individuals and how we want to progress.
This also allows us to clearly see that all of the yana's have the same final, ultimate result, but as Richard is pointing out they all have distinct methods of view, meditation, and conduct.
the term Hinayana does not refer to modern Theravada.
Hinayana is related to view and it is quite true that a practitioner with a Hinayana view cannot attain Buddhahood. The Hinayana view is one that has no concern for others. This label doesnt apply to modern Theravada.
Indeed it does not apply. I never use the term as it is disparaging when linked to Theravadans.
Nevertheless, I am in no doubt that 'Hinayana' is indeed still used by some TB teachers to sell their superiority to Theravada in the western market, although I will not name them.
What, in your view, separates the Hinayana view from the Theravada view?
Indeed it does not apply. I never use the term as it is disparaging when linked to Theravadans.
Nevertheless, I am in no doubt that 'Hinayana' is indeed still used by some TB teachers to sell their superiority to Theravada in the western market, although I will not name them.
What, in your view, separates the Hinayana view from the Theravada view?
in my experience the majority of Tibetan teachers no longer do this but I am sure some still do.
A practitioner can have a Hinayana view regardless of tradition, whether its Theravada, Mahayana, or Vajrayana. If a person is practicing Mahamudra without bodhicitta (which you cant really do) that person is practicing with a Hinayana view.
The difference to me is that there is a distict recognition of the effort to benefit others in the modern Theravada tradition.
If a person is practicing Mahamudra without bodhicitta (which you cant really do) that person is practicing with a Hinayana view.
The difference to me is that there is a distict recognition of the effort to benefit others in the modern Theravada tradition.
So true. I know literally dozens of HYT practitioners who have no understanding of the framework which makes it meaningful, nor any concept of preliminary practices. They simply grab an empowerment and think they are automatically prepared for the practice.
Again, I agree wholeheartedly. Theravadan practitioners have an equal capacity for compassion and altruism and I abhor the pejorative 'selfish' label attached by some Mahayanans. The more Buddhists of all traditions share their teachings and experiences, the faster such nonsense will disappear.
Yes. I'm am talking about the difference between "Staying" and "Going", embracing the world, and escaping it, and the different Sangha psychologies it creates. There was a dissonance between these two sangha psychologies that grew over the years, and has only now been resolved in a whole hearted choice of one.
I wonder whether this has more to do with the idiosyncrasies of the two Sanghas you attended than broader differences between the traditions, though.
I wonder whether this has more to do with the idiosyncrasies of the two Sanghas you attended than broader differences between the traditions, though.
There is much variation within "Theravada" and "Mahayana", so that may be the case, but my experience is not limited to just those Sanghas. Niether Sangha is closed minded in any way. Both have wonderful people who are progressive and honour different ways. It is just that as the practice deepened the differences that I had considered superficial, became more profound. Part of respecting different traditions may be honouring differences. The practice came to this. It came down to making a choice.
Other people may have different experiences on this matter, cant say.
hello. I am not a buddhist but I do study the religion extensively at degree level. I just wanted to clarify something that you may already know, but I would be careful of the use of the term 'hinayana' for describing theravada or non mahayana traditions. It seems that Hinayana, meaning something like 'lesser or inferior vehicle' (vehicle of the Buddhas message) is actually a derogatory term and should not be used when referring to non mahayana traditions.
Once one thinks about this you can see why- of course theravadin or non mahayana monks are not going to go around calling their faith and way 'inferior' to Mahayana. Instead it is better to simply say Theravada or non mahayana traditions to prevent offence.
I refer anyone who is interested in this relatively recent piece of scholarship to Mahayana Buddhism: the doctrinal foundations by Paul Williams, Routledge second ed 2009.
Williams is a leading expert in the field and this work is particularly helpful to those who want to have a clear and full guide to the understanding of mahayana Buddhism, its philosophy, schools and any differences between this and Theravada.
One other useful point some of you may not be aware of is that Mahayana buddhism is not actually a separate school of Buddhism to Theravada. This is because Theravada buddhism is a monastic orientation; ie is has its own separate vinaya code, whilst mahayana does not, but should perhaps be seen more as a different worldly outlook or view. Schisms in Buddhism only arise from a difference in opinion between monastic rules and not over practices or views. Therefore it is perfectly plausible that one could be a theravada mahayanist.
The word "greater" does not infer "better" or "superior" but refers to greater scope.
The Mahayana incorporated Hinduism into its teachings and developed new teachings so it could appeal to a greater scope of the population. There was a time when Theravada was losing its popularity and alienating itself from the greater population in India. This happens because the Hindu religions were incorporating Buddhist principles into them (eg. the Bhagavad Gita, incorporating non-attachment into a theistic teaching).
That may well be one take on it, yes, but in terms of what seems probable historically Mahayana Buddhists would refer to non mahayana as hinayana or lesser vehicle to their own, so in this sense it very much was meant as a derogatory expression.
Also, in terms of recent evidence the Mahayana tradition did not infact develop in order to appeal to a greater scope of people or the non monastic. It seems that the movement originated from meditation Buddhist pracitioners who were engrossed in solitary meditation in the forests of India and that some of the products of this new 'vision' were the result of visions they experienced during long periods of meditation, rather than as a decision to make the teachings more encompassing or popular as was previously theorized.
Again, i refer to the book I mentioned above which gives an interesting new angle to the development of early mahayana.
I think you'll find that the Bhagavad Gita was a much later development in history than the origins of the mahayana. Furthermore, Hinduism and Buddhism grew up in the same religious landscape, and within the umbrella term 'hinduism' we find many renouncer type traditions like Buddhism that have always expressed views of non attachment, such as the yoga tradition which stretches back into and before the emergence of Buddhism.
hello, no absolutely not! I am just talking in terms of the origins of the mahayana, not how it is practiced today.
What i mean is that monks at the time may have referred to others with the term hinayana or lesser vehicle, but in no sense were they against theravadins or those of the non mahayana tradition Like i said earlier both Mahayana and theravada practitioners would live harmoniously together in monasteries at the time. The term Hinayana is just often found in scriptures extolling the virtues of the mahayana way.
did not mean that they are not encompassing at all this would be very misleading apologies!
In terms of what mahayanists think about other religions, look no further than the encompassing intefaith dialogue the dalai lama has had with many other different religions. they are really very accepting.
The word "greater" does not infer "better" or "superior" but refers to greater scope.
I absolutely agree with you, Dhamma Dhatu. This is exactly how I prefer to address it, by way of thinking in accordance to the three scopes.
Hi Love & Peace..
While there are some from all schools and vehicles that do think any vehicle, school, or tradition other than their own are "inferior", this is rooted in both arrogance and ignorance. The different schools, vehicles, etc., exist in order to fulfill the various conditions of many different people.
hello. I am not a buddhist but I do study the religion extensively at degree level. I just wanted to clarify something that you may already know, but I would be careful of the use of the term 'hinayana' for describing theravada or non mahayana traditions. It seems that Hinayana, meaning something like 'lesser or inferior vehicle' (vehicle of the Buddhas message) is actually a derogatory term and should not be used when referring to non mahayana traditions.
Once one thinks about this you can see why- of course theravadin or non mahayana monks are not going to go around calling their faith and way 'inferior' to Mahayana. Instead it is better to simply say Theravada or non mahayana traditions to prevent offence.
I refer anyone who is interested in this relatively recent piece of scholarship to Mahayana Buddhism: the doctrinal foundations by Paul Williams, Routledge second ed 2009.
Williams is a leading expert in the field and this work is particularly helpful to those who want to have a clear and full guide to the understanding of mahayana Buddhism, its philosophy, schools and any differences between this and Theravada.
One other useful point some of you may not be aware of is that Mahayana buddhism is not actually a separate school of Buddhism to Theravada. This is because Theravada buddhism is a monastic orientation; ie is has its own separate vinaya code, whilst mahayana does not, but should perhaps be seen more as a different worldly outlook or view. Schisms in Buddhism only arise from a difference in opinion between monastic rules and not over practices or views. Therefore it is perfectly plausible that one could be a theravada mahayanist.
hope this is interesting or helps a bit!
The differences I describe from inside practice/sangha are between Zen and Theravada. What constitutes "Maha" or "Hina" I'll leave to others to hash out. Just one note, can't speak for the Vajrayana, but there is absolutely no Theism in Zen. Such terms as "true mind" and so forth are skillfull means and do not refer to an ontological absolute. Such interpretations belong to phony New Age, "Zen"...lets just be clear about this. The one thing that both Theravada and Zen share is seeing clearly the extremes of eternalism and nihilism.
I should also mention that my good freinds in both sanghas are not triumphalists for either stream. That seems to be an online thing.
BE1 CE 2
-80 -624/-560
The Bodhisatta (Sanskrit: Bodhisattva), or Buddha-to-be, is born in Lumbini (in present-day Nepal) as Siddhattha (Skt: Siddhartha) Gotama, a prince of the Sakya clan. { 1,2}
-51 -595/-531
The Bodhisatta renounces the householder life (age 29).
-45 -589/-525
While meditating under the Bo tree in the forest at Gaya (now Bodhgaya, India) during the full-moon night of May, the Bodhisatta becomes the Buddha (age 36).
During the full-moon night of July, the Buddha delivers his first discourse near Varanasi, introducing the world to the Four Noble Truths and commencing a 45-year career of teaching the religion he called "Dhamma-vinaya."
1 -544/-480
Parinibbana (Skt: Parinirvana; death and final release) of the Buddha, at Kusinara (now Kusinagar, India) (age 80). { 1, 3}
During the rains retreat following the Buddha's Parinibbana, the First Council convenes at Rajagaha, India, during which 500 arahant bhikkhus, led by Ven. Mahakassapa, gather to recite the entire body of the Buddha's teachings. The recitation of the Vinaya by Ven. Upali becomes accepted as the Vinaya Pitaka; the recitation of the Dhamma by Ven. Ananda becomes established as the Sutta Pitaka . { 1,4}
100 -444/-380
100 years after the Buddha's Parinibbana the Second Council convenes in Vesali to discuss controversial points of Vinaya. The first schism of the Sangha occurs, in which the Mahasanghika school parts ways with the traditionalist Sthaviravadins. At issue is the Mahasanghika's reluctance to accept the Suttas and the Vinaya as the final authority on the Buddha's teachings. This schism marks the first beginnings of what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism, which would come to dominate Buddhism in northern Asia (China, Tibet, Japan, Korea). { 1}
294 -250
Third Council is convened by King Asoka at Pataliputra (India). Disputes on points of doctrine lead to further schisms, spawning the Sarvastivadin and Vibhajjavadin sects. The Abhidhamma Pitaka is recited at the Council, along with additional sections of the Khuddaka Nikaya. The modern Pali Tipitaka is now essentially complete, although some scholars have suggested that at least two parts of the extant Canon — the Parivara in the Vinaya, and the Apadana in the Sutta — may date from a later period. { 1, 4}
297 -247
King Asoka sends his son, Ven. Mahinda, on a mission to bring Buddhism to Sri Lanka. King Devanampiya Tissa of Sri Lanka is converted. { 5}
304 -240
Ven. Mahinda establishes the Mahavihara (Great Monastery) of Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. The Vibhajjavadin community living there becomes known as the Theravadins. Mahinda compiles the first of the Tipitaka commentaries, in the Sinhala language. Mahinda's sister, Ven. Sanghamitta, arrives in Sri Lanka with a cutting from the original Bo tree, and establishes the bhikkhuni-sangha in Sri Lanka.{ 1, 5}
444 -100
Famine and schisms in Sri Lanka point out the need for a written record of the Tipitaka to preserve the Buddhist religion. King Vattagamani convenes a Fourth Council, in which 500 reciters and scribes from the Mahavihara write down the Pali Tipitaka for the first time, on palm leaves. { 4, 5, 6}
544 1
Common Era (CE) begins; Year 1 AD.
644 100
Theravada Buddhism first appears in Burma and Central Thailand. {1}
744 200
Buddhist monastic university at Nalanda, India flourishes; remains a world center of Buddhist study for over 1,000 years. { 1}
ca. 1000 5th c.
Ven. Buddhaghosa collates the various Sinhala commentaries on the Canon — drawing primarily on the Maha Atthakatha (Great Commentary) preserved at the Mahavihara — and translates them into Pali. This makes Sinhala Buddhist scholarship available for the first time to the entire Theravadan world and marks the beginning of what will become, in the centuries to follow, a vast body of post-canonical Pali literature. Buddhaghosa also composes his encyclopedic, though controversial, meditation manual Visuddhimagga (The Path of Purification). Vens. Buddhadatta and Dhammapala write additional commentaries and sub-commentaries. { 7}
ca. 1100 600's
BE 100 (-444 BCE)
The Second Buddhist Council:
One hundred years after the Parinibbana of the Buddha the Second Buddhist Council was held at Vesali in order to examine and suppress 10 practices that ran counter to the Vinaya, by a group of Vajjian monks. In the Cullavagga, it is said that the Vajjian monks were practicing the Ten Points (dasa vathuni) that were regarded as unorthodox by Venerable Yasa of Yosambi who was at Vesali.
The Ten Points were:
1. The practice of carrying salt in a horn for use when needed.
2. The practice of taking food after midday.
3. The practice of going to a neighboring village and taking a second meal the same day (the offence of overeating).
4. The observance of Uposothas in different places within the same parish.
5. The practice of performing an ecclesiastical act and obtaining its sanction afterward.
6. The practice of using customary practices as precedents.
7. The practice of drinking milk whey after meals.
8. The drinking fermented palm juice that is not yet toddy.
9. The use of a borderless sheet for sitting.
10. The acceptance of gold or silver.
Also at issue was the Vajjian monks reluctance to accept the Vinaya as the final authority on the Buddha's teachings.
Proceedings of the Second Buddhist Council:
There was an 8 member committee selected, comprised of 4 members from each, of the east and west countries. Bhikkhu Sabbakami was the president. Revata asked the questions and Sabbakami responded to them.
The Accounts of the Dipavamsa and Samantapasadika said that king Kalasoka, a decendant of Ajatasattu, was at first in favor of the Vajjjian monks but later gave his support to the council of Thera's.
The Dipavamsa also mentions the "Vajjian Council".
The Vajjian monks disagreed with the decision of the council chaired by Sabbakami and convened the Mahasangiti (Great Council). After the Second Buddhist Council the Vajjian monks did not want to remain in the Sangha of the Theravada or Sthaviravada. Thus they left and formed a new Sangha known as the Mahasangha or Mahasanghika, "The Great Congregation".
The schism marks the first beginnings of what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism, which would come to dominate Buddhism in northern Asia (China, Tibet, Japan and Korea).
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at Varanasi in the Game Refuge at Isipatana. There he addressed the group of five monks:
"There are these two extremes that are not to be indulged in by one who has gone forth. Which two? That which is devoted to sensual pleasure with reference to sensual objects: base, vulgar, common, ignoble, unprofitable; and that which is devoted to self-affliction: painful, ignoble, unprofitable. Avoiding both of these extremes, the middle way realized by the Tathagata — producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding.
"And what is the middle way realized by the Tathagata that — producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding? Precisely this Noble Eightfold Path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. This is the middle way realized by the Tathagata that — producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding.
"Now this, monks, is the noble truth of stress:1 Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; association with the unbeloved is stressful, separation from the loved is stressful, not getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful.
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of stress: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving.
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: precisely this Noble Eightfold Path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.
"Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: 'This is the noble truth of stress'... 'This noble truth of stress is to be comprehended'... 'This noble truth of stress has been comprehended.'
"Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: 'This is the noble truth of the origination of stress'... 'This noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned' 2 ... 'This noble truth of the origination of stress has been abandoned.'
"Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: 'This is the noble truth of the cessation of stress'... 'This noble truth of the cessation of stress is to be directly experienced'... 'This noble truth of the cessation of stress has been directly experienced.'
"Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: 'This is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress'... 'This noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress is to be developed'... 'This noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress has been developed.' 3
"And, monks, as long as this — my three-round, twelve-permutation knowledge & vision concerning these four noble truths as they have come to be was — not pure, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its deities, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & commonfolk. But as soon as this — my three-round, twelve-permutation knowledge & vision concerning these four noble truths as they have come to be — was truly pure, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its deities, Maras & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & commonfolk. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'"
The preceeding four posts are Theravadins collapsing other streams into the Theravada. This is only encountered online. I'm not debating of timelines and developements here, but it is the reduction of other streams to the Pali cannon, the Theravadin truth claim as "the real thing" that is a problem. Shall we now have A Vajrayana person (they are definitely out there) come at you guys with his counter history and claims of your Hinayana status?
Can not the accepting and respecting of differences exist without someone claiming They are the TRUEST?
The cornerstone in Theravada, the key authority, is Sutta....The Word. The cornerstone in Zen, the key authority, is a direct teacher student experience outside of Sutra. You can quote Suttas till the cows come home to a Zen student, and prove nothing. Likewise, a Zen Master can speak to you and it will have truth only in so far as it accords with the Pali Canon.
Here is a difference that needs to be understood and respected.
"In whatever Dhamma and Discipline the Noble Eightfold Path is not found, no ascetic is found of the first, the second, the third, or the fourth grade. But such ascetics can be found, of the first, second, third or fourth grade in a Dhamma and Discipline where the Noble Eightfold Path is found. Now, Subhadda, in this Dhamma and Discipline the Noble Eightfold Path is found, and in it are to be found ascetics of the first, second, third or fourth grade. Those other schools are devoid of [true] ascetics; but if in this one the monks were to live the life to perfection, the world would not lack for Arahants"
Clearly the core teachings of virtue, concentration and wisdom are an essential requirement and does not exclude any "yanas" from the Buddhist path.
I came to Zen training at the age of ten, as a requisite of traditional martial arts training in the spirit of the samurai. My sensei was an old school Rinzai master. We would sit seiza for long periods before, during, and after training to develop a mind as sharp as the edge of a katana. There was not training in the sutras, only zazen, only focused concentration. This training served me we'll in combat. It allowed me to move beyond fear and spontaneously react with skill to very dangerous circumstances. Without ethical discipline and a clear understanding of Bodhicitta and the wisdom knowing emptiness I became more and more like a demon. The pain of the harmfulness I brought into the world ate at my being and led me into a true hell realm on earth.
It wasn't until I began to apply the skill of Zazen to training in renunciation, ethical discipline, compassion, and wisdom that I became able to start slowly eliminating the harmfulness and pain I was conditioned to.
I have been trained in both Soto and Rinzai lineages with formal instruction in both (actual Buddhist seminary training) and in the Mahayana aspects of Tibetan traditions, and Chan lineages, and studied Theravadin teachings as part of all of that training.
After nearly 47 years, I'm still a Zen, Lamrim and Vajrayana trainee and a fan of Abhidharma and Theravadin meditation practices.
In addition, for those who believe that "it's all the same on the mat" I wish to offer my experience as a warning. It is not the same. Zen devoid of the ethics, compassion, altruistic intention, and wisdom training offered in the sutras can be very harmful. I imagine that is why there is an emphasis placed on having a sensei in the Zen school. And, here is a problem, if there is no teacher or the teacher does not inspire and encourage training in ethics, compassion, bodhicitta, and wisdom big problems will arise!
I came to Zen training at the age of ten, as a requisite of traditional martial arts training in the spirit of the samurai. My sensei was an old school Rinzai master. We would sit seiza for long periods before, during, and after training to develop a mind as sharp as the edge of a katana. There was not training in the sutras, only zazen, only focused concentration. This training served me we'll in combat. It allowed me to move beyond fear and spontaneously react with skill to very dangerous circumstances. Without ethical discipline and a clear understanding of Bodhicitta and the wisdom knowing emptiness I became more and more like a demon. The pain of the harmfulness I brought into the world ate at my being and led me into a true hell realm on earth.
It wasn't until I began to apply the skill of Zazen to training in renunciation, ethical discipline, compassion, and wisdom that I became able to start slowly eliminating the harmfulness and pain I was conditioned to.
I have been trained in both Soto and Rinzai lineages with formal instruction in both (actual Buddhist seminary training) and in the Mahayana aspects of Tibetan traditions, and Chan lineages, and studied Theravadin teachings as part of all of that training.
After nearly 47 years, I'm still a Zen, Lamrim and Vajrayana trainee and a fan of Abhidharma and Theravadin meditation practices.
In addition, for those who believe that "it's all the same on the mat" I wish to offer my experience as a warning. It is not the same. Zen devoid of the ethics, compassion, altruistic intention, and wisdom training offered in the sutras can be very harmful. I imagine that is why there is an emphasis placed on having a sensei in the Zen school. And, here is a problem, if there is no teacher or the teacher does not inspire and encourage training in ethics, compassion, bodhicitta, and wisdom big problems will arise!
Shalom and Hugs
Fudoshin should indeed be at the core of martial arts and of daily life. The first renunciation is that of fear.
Correct, dear friend. Yet, true courage is so difficult to "know." I appreciate your insightful responses.
Shalom and Hugs
I'm sure you may recognise what follows:
We all know fear and often recognise that we cannot eliminate the causes - falling, insects, fire, violence etc etc
To know that pure moment when all time seems to stop and you react to attacks with instinct alone, devoid of fear and even thoughts of technique and 'self' - that is magical. It is not courage - it is equanimity.
If fear is absent, courage is also absent.
In the Mahayana it may be understood that the lineage of the martial art must surely indicate that techniques have been refined and improved over time, and that they are 'authentic'. Such it is with Dharma in the forms within which we practise it.
Personally, I try to find the earliest source of what I am studying - this may be wrong, in that recent teachers within the lineage may have improved upon the work of their predecessors. I do so on the basis that unless I see an improvement , it is likely that the modern teacher has diluted and diverted what was intended, which is the last thing we want with the Buddhadharma.
Thank You, I'll contemplate that. I immediately imagine courage may lead to equanimity.
P.S. I have experienced the "pure moment" you mention, bathed in blood. It was horrific afterwards. I'm still healing.
Yes, unfortunately we do have a lot of "duck soup" or watered-down stuff out there. I'm with you, I'm very picky about who I train with.
Remember the old story of the Tea Master. An assassin was sent to kill him, but returned having failed. When asked why he simple said: 'There was no opening for me to attack'. The Tea Master had attained fudoshin and equanimity - there simply was no 'self' for the assassin to attack.
I consider myself supremely lucky in that the more violent the attack, the more 'detached' from it, and from my 'self', I become. We used to train and grade, at black belt level, with live tanto - very sharp. Techniques simply did not work well without a strong attack which could kill if it was successful (no health & safety or insurance problems then). I was fortunate with my masters - which I put down to checking out their lineage and then seeing if their techniques worked.
I came to Zen training at the age of ten, as a requisite of traditional martial arts training in the spirit of the samurai. My sensei was an old school Rinzai master. We would sit seiza for long periods before, during, and after training to develop a mind as sharp as the edge of a katana. There was not training in the sutras, only zazen, only focused concentration. This training served me we'll in combat. It allowed me to move beyond fear and spontaneously react with skill to very dangerous circumstances. Without ethical discipline and a clear understanding of Bodhicitta and the wisdom knowing emptiness I became more and more like a demon. The pain of the harmfulness I brought into the world ate at my being and led me into a true hell realm on earth.
It wasn't until I began to apply the skill of Zazen to training in renunciation, ethical discipline, compassion, and wisdom that I became able to start slowly eliminating the harmfulness and pain I was conditioned to.
I have been trained in both Soto and Rinzai lineages with formal instruction in both (actual Buddhist seminary training) and in the Mahayana aspects of Tibetan traditions, and Chan lineages, and studied Theravadin teachings as part of all of that training.
After nearly 47 years, I'm still a Zen, Lamrim and Vajrayana trainee and a fan of Abhidharma and Theravadin meditation practices.
In addition, for those who believe that "it's all the same on the mat" I wish to offer my experience as a warning. It is not the same. Zen devoid of the ethics, compassion, altruistic intention, and wisdom training offered in the sutras can be very harmful. I imagine that is why there is an emphasis placed on having a sensei in the Zen school. And, here is a problem, if there is no teacher or the teacher does not inspire and encourage training in ethics, compassion, bodhicitta, and wisdom big problems will arise!
Shalom and Hugs
Thankyou for that story Brother Bob. Buddhism without Heart is a tragic thing, whether it is a sword wielding Zen practitioner or a cold withdrawn Bhikkhu. Compassion is the beating heart of all true practice.
Thankyou for that story Brother Bob. Buddhism without Heart is a tragic thing, whether it is a sword wielding Zen practitioner or a cold withdrawn Bhikkhu. Compassion is the beating heart of all true practice.
I agree it is one of many essential aspects with which to practise.
If one only attains liberation without think of the suffering of others what a hollow practise we have.
if one attains liberation, then they would be overwhelmed with immense compassion and love
treading the way for oneself is the selfsame as treading it for all.
if one attains liberation, then they would be overwhelmed with immense compassion and love
treading the way for oneself is the selfsame as treading it for all.
Nope ive met many people who seem to have a complete lack of motivation on this behalf.
That's an interesting and important story Brother Bob, it just proves that we need to include compassion into a way of life, as a couple of other people have said (in other words) :-/
Love & Peace
Joe
From a strictly psychological point of view, the deliberate cultivation of compassion espoused by the Mahayana school creates a healthier persona ...
You know that saying, "Get over yourself!" ? Well, it is a psychological truth that those people who are most self-absorbed are least happy, and that the more one thinks of others, the more balanced and happier they are.
While both paths lead to Rome, I'm self-absorbed enough to want to chose the "happier" path!
From a strictly psychological point of view, the deliberate cultivation of compassion espoused by the Mahayana school creates a healthier persona ...
:hrm:
Here is a stick. .......Maybe you can find a Theravada person to poke in the eye. Theravadins are not by definition withdrawn or self absorbed, and Mahayana people can be very much so. One is not inherently healthier than the other.
I'm not going to argue that. But I'll just point out something I read in a text the Jewel Ornament of Liberation. In that text a Mahayanist is defined as a person with certain mental qualities which are helpful. If a theravadin or a zen practitioner has these qualities then by my understanding of JOL they would be mahayana family. Also if a so called mahayana practitioner does not have these qualities then they belong in a different family.
I just wanted to introduce the idea of a Mahayanist as a person with certain qualities. I am open to discussing that. I would be reluctant to debate whether that text JOL is true (reliable or benefitial) or not because I do not have the experience in my practice to make a comment on that.
I'm not going to argue that. But I'll just point out something I read in a text the Jewel Ornament of Liberation. In that text a Mahayanist is defined as a person with certain mental qualities which are helpful. If a theravadin or a zen practitioner has these qualities then by my understanding of JOL they would be mahayana family. Also if a so called mahayana practitioner does not have these qualities then they belong in a different family.
I just wanted to introduce the idea of a Mahayanist as a person with certain qualities. I am open to discussing that. I would be reluctant to debate whether that text JOL is true (reliable or benefitial) or not because I do not have the experience in my practice to make a comment on that.
Technically speaking Zen is "Mahayana". Practice is grounded in the Bodhisattva vows. But I think the general point is a great way of seeing it. An open hearted, engaged person is an open hearted engaged person in any vehicle. Some of the Thai Forest Monks and Nuns for instance are greater Bodhisattvas than many Mahayana "Bodhisattvas".
IMHO, all schools that embrace Siddhattha Gotama's teachings are valid. They each diverge to adapt to their own cultures, but as long as the Dhamma persists, so too does the path to liberation.
Whoever posted earlier that it would be more correct to not be labeled as Theravada or Mahayana, but rather as a follower of the Buddhadhamma, seems to me to have the right idea. I don't even classify myself as a Buddhist, even having achieved some level of liberation from ignorance by studying the Pali Canon and various other texts that helped explain them.
In truth, none of this is a religion. It doesn't have to be that one way is more right than another. Those who realize the truth find themselves in the same place, and the school/Sangha and its traditions and rules fall away with wisdom. You begin to do the right thing out of right understanding, not because it's what you are taught to do.
IMHO, all schools that embrace Siddhattha Gotama's teachings are valid. They each diverge to adapt to their own cultures, but as long as the Dhamma persists, so too does the path to liberation.
Whoever posted earlier that it would be more correct to not be labeled as Theravada or Mahayana, but rather as a follower of the Buddhadhamma, seems to me to have the right idea. I don't even classify myself as a Buddhist, even having achieved some level of liberation from ignorance by studying the Pali Canon and various other texts that helped explain them.
In truth, none of this is a religion. It doesn't have to be that one way is more right than another. Those who realize the truth find themselves in the same place, and the school/Sangha and its traditions and rules fall away with wisdom. You begin to do the right thing out of right understanding, not because it's what you are taught to do.
Just my two cents.
Oh suuure its religion. My first teacher was asked if it was a religion, and his answer was " revenue Canada (federal tax law) says its a religion, so its a religion.. Personally I prefer "religion" to "spirituality". The former implies giving something up, the later is a ....lifestyle. A great innoculation against "spirituality" is Trungpa's "cutting through spiritual materialism". A senior member of my current sangha said not long ago. "This is not about spirituality" It was nice to hear.:)
Very funny, Richard. BTW, I've read many of your posts here and there (mostly both here and there, you're very prolific in your writings), and your insight seems to be most keen on many subjects. I thank you for your efforts.
Comments
this is where the Nyingma nine yana breakdown becomes quite useful.
Rather than simply lumping yana's into the three mentioned above they use a system that specifies the view, meditation, and conduct of the shravakayana, pratyekabuddhayana, bodhisattvayana, the outer tantra's of kriya, ubaya, and yoga and the inner tantras of mahayoga, anuyoga, and atiyoga.
When we can thoroughly look at the different methods of practice we can see the differences and similarities of the diverse methods of Buddhadharma and appraise where we might fit in as individuals and how we want to progress.
This also allows us to clearly see that all of the yana's have the same final, ultimate result, but as Richard is pointing out they all have distinct methods of view, meditation, and conduct.
Indeed it does not apply. I never use the term as it is disparaging when linked to Theravadans.
Nevertheless, I am in no doubt that 'Hinayana' is indeed still used by some TB teachers to sell their superiority to Theravada in the western market, although I will not name them.
What, in your view, separates the Hinayana view from the Theravada view?
in my experience the majority of Tibetan teachers no longer do this but I am sure some still do.
A practitioner can have a Hinayana view regardless of tradition, whether its Theravada, Mahayana, or Vajrayana. If a person is practicing Mahamudra without bodhicitta (which you cant really do) that person is practicing with a Hinayana view.
The difference to me is that there is a distict recognition of the effort to benefit others in the modern Theravada tradition.
So true. I know literally dozens of HYT practitioners who have no understanding of the framework which makes it meaningful, nor any concept of preliminary practices. They simply grab an empowerment and think they are automatically prepared for the practice.
Again, I agree wholeheartedly. Theravadan practitioners have an equal capacity for compassion and altruism and I abhor the pejorative 'selfish' label attached by some Mahayanans. The more Buddhists of all traditions share their teachings and experiences, the faster such nonsense will disappear.
I fully agree with you :thumbsup:<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->
Other people may have different experiences on this matter, cant say.
Once one thinks about this you can see why- of course theravadin or non mahayana monks are not going to go around calling their faith and way 'inferior' to Mahayana. Instead it is better to simply say Theravada or non mahayana traditions to prevent offence.
I refer anyone who is interested in this relatively recent piece of scholarship to Mahayana Buddhism: the doctrinal foundations by Paul Williams, Routledge second ed 2009.
Williams is a leading expert in the field and this work is particularly helpful to those who want to have a clear and full guide to the understanding of mahayana Buddhism, its philosophy, schools and any differences between this and Theravada.
One other useful point some of you may not be aware of is that Mahayana buddhism is not actually a separate school of Buddhism to Theravada. This is because Theravada buddhism is a monastic orientation; ie is has its own separate vinaya code, whilst mahayana does not, but should perhaps be seen more as a different worldly outlook or view. Schisms in Buddhism only arise from a difference in opinion between monastic rules and not over practices or views. Therefore it is perfectly plausible that one could be a theravada mahayanist.
hope this is interesting or helps a bit!
The Mahayana incorporated Hinduism into its teachings and developed new teachings so it could appeal to a greater scope of the population. There was a time when Theravada was losing its popularity and alienating itself from the greater population in India. This happens because the Hindu religions were incorporating Buddhist principles into them (eg. the Bhagavad Gita, incorporating non-attachment into a theistic teaching).
Love & Peace
Joe
Also, in terms of recent evidence the Mahayana tradition did not infact develop in order to appeal to a greater scope of people or the non monastic. It seems that the movement originated from meditation Buddhist pracitioners who were engrossed in solitary meditation in the forests of India and that some of the products of this new 'vision' were the result of visions they experienced during long periods of meditation, rather than as a decision to make the teachings more encompassing or popular as was previously theorized.
Again, i refer to the book I mentioned above which gives an interesting new angle to the development of early mahayana.
I think you'll find that the Bhagavad Gita was a much later development in history than the origins of the mahayana. Furthermore, Hinduism and Buddhism grew up in the same religious landscape, and within the umbrella term 'hinduism' we find many renouncer type traditions like Buddhism that have always expressed views of non attachment, such as the yoga tradition which stretches back into and before the emergence of Buddhism.
:-)
Love & Peace
Joe
What i mean is that monks at the time may have referred to others with the term hinayana or lesser vehicle, but in no sense were they against theravadins or those of the non mahayana tradition Like i said earlier both Mahayana and theravada practitioners would live harmoniously together in monasteries at the time. The term Hinayana is just often found in scriptures extolling the virtues of the mahayana way.
did not mean that they are not encompassing at all this would be very misleading apologies!
No more then any Theravaden would view anyother sect as lesser to their own...Uh wait.
I absolutely agree with you, Dhamma Dhatu. This is exactly how I prefer to address it, by way of thinking in accordance to the three scopes.
Hi Love & Peace..
While there are some from all schools and vehicles that do think any vehicle, school, or tradition other than their own are "inferior", this is rooted in both arrogance and ignorance. The different schools, vehicles, etc., exist in order to fulfill the various conditions of many different people.
I should also mention that my good freinds in both sanghas are not triumphalists for either stream. That seems to be an online thing.
BE1 CE 2
-80 -624/-560
The Bodhisatta (Sanskrit: Bodhisattva), or Buddha-to-be, is born in Lumbini (in present-day Nepal) as Siddhattha (Skt: Siddhartha) Gotama, a prince of the Sakya clan. { 1,2}
-51 -595/-531
The Bodhisatta renounces the householder life (age 29).
-45 -589/-525
While meditating under the Bo tree in the forest at Gaya (now Bodhgaya, India) during the full-moon night of May, the Bodhisatta becomes the Buddha (age 36).
During the full-moon night of July, the Buddha delivers his first discourse near Varanasi, introducing the world to the Four Noble Truths and commencing a 45-year career of teaching the religion he called "Dhamma-vinaya."
1 -544/-480
Parinibbana (Skt: Parinirvana; death and final release) of the Buddha, at Kusinara (now Kusinagar, India) (age 80). { 1, 3}
During the rains retreat following the Buddha's Parinibbana, the First Council convenes at Rajagaha, India, during which 500 arahant bhikkhus, led by Ven. Mahakassapa, gather to recite the entire body of the Buddha's teachings. The recitation of the Vinaya by Ven. Upali becomes accepted as the Vinaya Pitaka; the recitation of the Dhamma by Ven. Ananda becomes established as the Sutta Pitaka . { 1,4}
100 -444/-380
100 years after the Buddha's Parinibbana the Second Council convenes in Vesali to discuss controversial points of Vinaya. The first schism of the Sangha occurs, in which the Mahasanghika school parts ways with the traditionalist Sthaviravadins. At issue is the Mahasanghika's reluctance to accept the Suttas and the Vinaya as the final authority on the Buddha's teachings. This schism marks the first beginnings of what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism, which would come to dominate Buddhism in northern Asia (China, Tibet, Japan, Korea). { 1}
294 -250
Third Council is convened by King Asoka at Pataliputra (India). Disputes on points of doctrine lead to further schisms, spawning the Sarvastivadin and Vibhajjavadin sects. The Abhidhamma Pitaka is recited at the Council, along with additional sections of the Khuddaka Nikaya. The modern Pali Tipitaka is now essentially complete, although some scholars have suggested that at least two parts of the extant Canon — the Parivara in the Vinaya, and the Apadana in the Sutta — may date from a later period. { 1, 4}
297 -247
King Asoka sends his son, Ven. Mahinda, on a mission to bring Buddhism to Sri Lanka. King Devanampiya Tissa of Sri Lanka is converted. { 5}
304 -240
Ven. Mahinda establishes the Mahavihara (Great Monastery) of Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. The Vibhajjavadin community living there becomes known as the Theravadins. Mahinda compiles the first of the Tipitaka commentaries, in the Sinhala language. Mahinda's sister, Ven. Sanghamitta, arrives in Sri Lanka with a cutting from the original Bo tree, and establishes the bhikkhuni-sangha in Sri Lanka.{ 1, 5}
444 -100
Famine and schisms in Sri Lanka point out the need for a written record of the Tipitaka to preserve the Buddhist religion. King Vattagamani convenes a Fourth Council, in which 500 reciters and scribes from the Mahavihara write down the Pali Tipitaka for the first time, on palm leaves. { 4, 5, 6}
544 1
Common Era (CE) begins; Year 1 AD.
644 100
Theravada Buddhism first appears in Burma and Central Thailand. {1}
744 200
Buddhist monastic university at Nalanda, India flourishes; remains a world center of Buddhist study for over 1,000 years. { 1}
ca. 1000 5th c.
Ven. Buddhaghosa collates the various Sinhala commentaries on the Canon — drawing primarily on the Maha Atthakatha (Great Commentary) preserved at the Mahavihara — and translates them into Pali. This makes Sinhala Buddhist scholarship available for the first time to the entire Theravadan world and marks the beginning of what will become, in the centuries to follow, a vast body of post-canonical Pali literature. Buddhaghosa also composes his encyclopedic, though controversial, meditation manual Visuddhimagga (The Path of Purification). Vens. Buddhadatta and Dhammapala write additional commentaries and sub-commentaries. { 7}
ca. 1100 600's
The Second Buddhist Council:
One hundred years after the Parinibbana of the Buddha the Second Buddhist Council was held at Vesali in order to examine and suppress 10 practices that ran counter to the Vinaya, by a group of Vajjian monks. In the Cullavagga, it is said that the Vajjian monks were practicing the Ten Points (dasa vathuni) that were regarded as unorthodox by Venerable Yasa of Yosambi who was at Vesali.
The Ten Points were:
1. The practice of carrying salt in a horn for use when needed.
2. The practice of taking food after midday.
3. The practice of going to a neighboring village and taking a second meal the same day (the offence of overeating).
4. The observance of Uposothas in different places within the same parish.
5. The practice of performing an ecclesiastical act and obtaining its sanction afterward.
6. The practice of using customary practices as precedents.
7. The practice of drinking milk whey after meals.
8. The drinking fermented palm juice that is not yet toddy.
9. The use of a borderless sheet for sitting.
10. The acceptance of gold or silver.
Also at issue was the Vajjian monks reluctance to accept the Vinaya as the final authority on the Buddha's teachings.
Proceedings of the Second Buddhist Council:
There was an 8 member committee selected, comprised of 4 members from each, of the east and west countries. Bhikkhu Sabbakami was the president. Revata asked the questions and Sabbakami responded to them.
The Accounts of the Dipavamsa and Samantapasadika said that king Kalasoka, a decendant of Ajatasattu, was at first in favor of the Vajjjian monks but later gave his support to the council of Thera's.
The Dipavamsa also mentions the "Vajjian Council".
The Vajjian monks disagreed with the decision of the council chaired by Sabbakami and convened the Mahasangiti (Great Council). After the Second Buddhist Council the Vajjian monks did not want to remain in the Sangha of the Theravada or Sthaviravada. Thus they left and formed a new Sangha known as the Mahasangha or Mahasanghika, "The Great Congregation".
The schism marks the first beginnings of what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism, which would come to dominate Buddhism in northern Asia (China, Tibet, Japan and Korea).
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.than.html
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at Varanasi in the Game Refuge at Isipatana. There he addressed the group of five monks:
"There are these two extremes that are not to be indulged in by one who has gone forth. Which two? That which is devoted to sensual pleasure with reference to sensual objects: base, vulgar, common, ignoble, unprofitable; and that which is devoted to self-affliction: painful, ignoble, unprofitable. Avoiding both of these extremes, the middle way realized by the Tathagata — producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding.
"And what is the middle way realized by the Tathagata that — producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding? Precisely this Noble Eightfold Path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. This is the middle way realized by the Tathagata that — producing vision, producing knowledge — leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding.
"Now this, monks, is the noble truth of stress:1 Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; association with the unbeloved is stressful, separation from the loved is stressful, not getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful.
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the origination of stress: the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming.
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the cessation of stress: the remainderless fading & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go of that very craving.
"And this, monks, is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress: precisely this Noble Eightfold Path — right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.
"Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: 'This is the noble truth of stress'... 'This noble truth of stress is to be comprehended'... 'This noble truth of stress has been comprehended.'
"Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: 'This is the noble truth of the origination of stress'... 'This noble truth of the origination of stress is to be abandoned' 2 ... 'This noble truth of the origination of stress has been abandoned.'
"Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: 'This is the noble truth of the cessation of stress'... 'This noble truth of the cessation of stress is to be directly experienced'... 'This noble truth of the cessation of stress has been directly experienced.'
"Vision arose, insight arose, discernment arose, knowledge arose, illumination arose within me with regard to things never heard before: 'This is the noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress'... 'This noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress is to be developed'... 'This noble truth of the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress has been developed.' 3
"And, monks, as long as this — my three-round, twelve-permutation knowledge & vision concerning these four noble truths as they have come to be was — not pure, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its deities, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & commonfolk. But as soon as this — my three-round, twelve-permutation knowledge & vision concerning these four noble truths as they have come to be — was truly pure, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its deities, Maras & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & commonfolk. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'"
Please "know" this!
'To know and not to do is, in fact, not to know!'
Shalom and Hugs
Can not the accepting and respecting of differences exist without someone claiming They are the TRUEST?
Here is a difference that needs to be understood and respected.
Clearly the core teachings of virtue, concentration and wisdom are an essential requirement and does not exclude any "yanas" from the Buddhist path.
Namaste ......different vehicles, all beautiful, all true.
Love & Peace
Joe
I came to Zen training at the age of ten, as a requisite of traditional martial arts training in the spirit of the samurai. My sensei was an old school Rinzai master. We would sit seiza for long periods before, during, and after training to develop a mind as sharp as the edge of a katana. There was not training in the sutras, only zazen, only focused concentration. This training served me we'll in combat. It allowed me to move beyond fear and spontaneously react with skill to very dangerous circumstances. Without ethical discipline and a clear understanding of Bodhicitta and the wisdom knowing emptiness I became more and more like a demon. The pain of the harmfulness I brought into the world ate at my being and led me into a true hell realm on earth.
It wasn't until I began to apply the skill of Zazen to training in renunciation, ethical discipline, compassion, and wisdom that I became able to start slowly eliminating the harmfulness and pain I was conditioned to.
I have been trained in both Soto and Rinzai lineages with formal instruction in both (actual Buddhist seminary training) and in the Mahayana aspects of Tibetan traditions, and Chan lineages, and studied Theravadin teachings as part of all of that training.
After nearly 47 years, I'm still a Zen, Lamrim and Vajrayana trainee and a fan of Abhidharma and Theravadin meditation practices.
In addition, for those who believe that "it's all the same on the mat" I wish to offer my experience as a warning. It is not the same. Zen devoid of the ethics, compassion, altruistic intention, and wisdom training offered in the sutras can be very harmful. I imagine that is why there is an emphasis placed on having a sensei in the Zen school. And, here is a problem, if there is no teacher or the teacher does not inspire and encourage training in ethics, compassion, bodhicitta, and wisdom big problems will arise!
Shalom and Hugs
Fudoshin should indeed be at the core of martial arts and of daily life. The first renunciation is that of fear.
Correct, dear friend. Yet, true courage is so difficult to "know." I appreciate your insightful responses.
Shalom and Hugs
I'm sure you may recognise what follows:
We all know fear and often recognise that we cannot eliminate the causes - falling, insects, fire, violence etc etc
To know that pure moment when all time seems to stop and you react to attacks with instinct alone, devoid of fear and even thoughts of technique and 'self' - that is magical. It is not courage - it is equanimity.
If fear is absent, courage is also absent.
In the Mahayana it may be understood that the lineage of the martial art must surely indicate that techniques have been refined and improved over time, and that they are 'authentic'. Such it is with Dharma in the forms within which we practise it.
Personally, I try to find the earliest source of what I am studying - this may be wrong, in that recent teachers within the lineage may have improved upon the work of their predecessors. I do so on the basis that unless I see an improvement , it is likely that the modern teacher has diluted and diverted what was intended, which is the last thing we want with the Buddhadharma.
P.S. I have experienced the "pure moment" you mention, bathed in blood. It was horrific afterwards. I'm still healing.
Yes, unfortunately we do have a lot of "duck soup" or watered-down stuff out there. I'm with you, I'm very picky about who I train with.
Remember the old story of the Tea Master. An assassin was sent to kill him, but returned having failed. When asked why he simple said: 'There was no opening for me to attack'. The Tea Master had attained fudoshin and equanimity - there simply was no 'self' for the assassin to attack.
I consider myself supremely lucky in that the more violent the attack, the more 'detached' from it, and from my 'self', I become. We used to train and grade, at black belt level, with live tanto - very sharp. Techniques simply did not work well without a strong attack which could kill if it was successful (no health & safety or insurance problems then). I was fortunate with my masters - which I put down to checking out their lineage and then seeing if their techniques worked.
I agree it is one of many essential aspects with which to practise.
If one only attains liberation without think of the suffering of others what a hollow practise we have.
treading the way for oneself is the selfsame as treading it for all.
Nope ive met many people who seem to have a complete lack of motivation on this behalf.
Love & Peace
Joe
You know that saying, "Get over yourself!" ? Well, it is a psychological truth that those people who are most self-absorbed are least happy, and that the more one thinks of others, the more balanced and happier they are.
While both paths lead to Rome, I'm self-absorbed enough to want to chose the "happier" path!
Here is a stick. .......Maybe you can find a Theravada person to poke in the eye. Theravadins are not by definition withdrawn or self absorbed, and Mahayana people can be very much so. One is not inherently healthier than the other.
I just wanted to introduce the idea of a Mahayanist as a person with certain qualities. I am open to discussing that. I would be reluctant to debate whether that text JOL is true (reliable or benefitial) or not because I do not have the experience in my practice to make a comment on that.
IMHO, all schools that embrace Siddhattha Gotama's teachings are valid. They each diverge to adapt to their own cultures, but as long as the Dhamma persists, so too does the path to liberation.
Whoever posted earlier that it would be more correct to not be labeled as Theravada or Mahayana, but rather as a follower of the Buddhadhamma, seems to me to have the right idea. I don't even classify myself as a Buddhist, even having achieved some level of liberation from ignorance by studying the Pali Canon and various other texts that helped explain them.
In truth, none of this is a religion. It doesn't have to be that one way is more right than another. Those who realize the truth find themselves in the same place, and the school/Sangha and its traditions and rules fall away with wisdom. You begin to do the right thing out of right understanding, not because it's what you are taught to do.
Just my two cents.