Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
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.

Flavours...

JamithicusJamithicus
edited February 2010 in Buddhism Basics
What is your school of Buddhism and why did you choose it? As in why be Mahayana over Theravada etc. ?

I'm just interested about why different practices appeal to people, and the experiences they have got from their school...

Comments

  • NamelessRiverNamelessRiver Veteran
    edited February 2010
    After an information overload I was feeling a bit lost until I found out that I really work well with Lam Rim teachings (from Tsongkhapa) and its structure, so that is what I am doing now. I don't like to say I am adept of "Tibetan Buddhism" or whatever because, well, I am not Tibetan and it feels a bit weird to say that, and I have no contact with Tibetan Monks or whatever.

    Anyways I can say at least that I 'ring' with Mahayana teachings that incidentally come from Tibetan teachers.
    I'm just interested about why different practices appeal to people, and the experiences they have got from their school...
    I needed a structure, a sort of step-by-step, I found it in Lam Rim, so that is why it appeals to me. So far it has worked very well.
  • RayfieldNeelRayfieldNeel
    edited February 2010
    I am undecided. Some aspects of Theravada make a lot of sense to me..yet I am also drawn to the simplicity of Zen.
  • JamithicusJamithicus
    edited February 2010
    RayfieldNeel wrote: »
    I am undecided. Some aspects of Theravada make a lot of sense to me..yet I am also drawn to the simplicity of Zen.

    What about Theravada was good for you? I started off by reading What The Buddha Taught By Walpola Ruhala, and that was from a Theravada point of view (he converted from Mahayana, actually) and I still feel drawn to it's thoughtful nature.

    I always thought Tibetan Budddhism was a bit ritualized.
  • nibbutinibbuti
    edited February 2010
    Hi Jamithicus

    Being a newcomer, i didn't like the idea of "favoring" and "opposing" one school over another.

    So i let go of all the uncertainty and thinking.

    Cause & effect led me to a certain school of Buddhism.

    Even though i don't accept everything that is associated with that school, i decided to stick with it.

    Now i am happy.

    With metta.
  • PietroPumokinPietroPumokin
    edited February 2010
    Jamithicus wrote: »
    What about Theravada was good for you? I started off by reading What The Buddha Taught By Walpola Ruhala, and that was from a Theravada point of view (he converted from Mahayana, actually) and I still feel drawn to it's thoughtful nature.

    I always thought Tibetan Budddhism was a bit ritualized.
    it is, but the rituals they use i think are great practices. or at least they seem to be, i am mostly a zen buddhist so i don't know a lot about them myself. i like mahayana very much because it feels more youthful to me, but i like theravada's procedures a lot too.
  • sukhitasukhita
    edited February 2010
    I base my practice on the Theravada tradition because it seems to be the closest to what the Buddha taught...Theravada is the earliest school of Buddhism that presently exists. I didn't feel 'comfortable' with the semi-divine figures in the Mahayana traditions.
  • JamithicusJamithicus
    edited February 2010
    sukhita wrote: »
    I base my practice on the Theravada tradition because it seems to be the closest to what the Buddha taught...Theravada is the earliest school of Buddhism that presently exists. I didn't feel 'comfortable' with the semi-divine figures in the Mahayana traditions.

    This is a lot of the reason why I like Theravada. I was a bit worried reading Mahayana books that a lot of it was not in the original teachings of the Buddha. However Theravada seems a bit stuffy in their ways, which I suppose is why the Mahayana peeps call it the Lesser Vehicle.

    Why is Mahayana so ritualized? I thought Buddhism was all about thought and consideration of teachings etc. .

    And finally, what are the defining points of Zen tradition? Sorry, I'm a bit full of questions :lol:.
  • PietroPumokinPietroPumokin
    edited February 2010
    mahayana includes several different schools, zen being one of them, which you could say has less ritual in it than theravada. but rituals performed in vajrayana (the diamond vehicle) are meant to hasten the path towards enlightenment, which i think is why it's called the diamond vehicle. i don't know exactly though because i'm not a scholar. but vajrayana (which i think is pretty much the same as tibetan buddhism) (SO dont QUOTE me) is still very considerate of the buddha's teachings, and very thoughtful, these are just specific meditation practices which are supposed to harness the practitioner's inherent buddha nature in a very developed manner. but like i said i'm not a tibetan buddhist so i don't know EXACTLY what i'm talking about. zen, on its side, is mostly about zazen, (sitting meditation), and spontaneous action, it is related to taoism which has as one of its principles wu-wei, effortless action, basically just being. as you may know zen is a japanese word, but zen actually has its origins in china where it is called chan, but zen caught on, maybe because it has a z in it and sounds cooler, and also possibly because of zen master dogen's influence. i would say because z is a great letter.
  • RayfieldNeelRayfieldNeel
    edited February 2010
    My preference for Theravada and Zen probably stems from my way of practicing, which is very meditation-centric, and from random cause and effect. The podcasts and writings that have resonated with me on how to meditate have been from those schools.

    I have nothing at all against the other Mahayana schools of thought. I do get a bit lost with some of the Bodhisattva-Karmic Ties stuff that gets talked about.
  • ansannaansanna Veteran
    edited February 2010
    One should know that in Buddha Dharma , there are general meaning and specific meaning to the same Buddhist terminlogies.
    General meaning refers to the generalized meaning , and specific meaning refers to the specific meaning according to the level of cultivation and specific dharma gate.

    For example , at different level of meaning to , dharma , nirvana , buddhahood , bodhisattva etc
    there are Nikaya teaching, Connecting teaching, introductary Mahayana , provisional Mahayana , gradual teaching, Sudden teaching, Specific Teaching, Complete Teaching etc

    As the Great Teacher Tientai ( Chi-i , Zhi-i ) said as a buddhist practitioner that confused with the general and specific understanding may not get the practitioner any way in their advance cultivation.
    .
  • RayfieldNeelRayfieldNeel
    edited February 2010
    LOL, I think I follow what you're saying, ansanna, but if I were to attempt to explain Buddhism to an inquisitive neophyte with that kind of layers-upon-layers-upon-layers dialog, I'd never be able to get their attention again!

    Somehow I just can't shake the feeling that it shouldn't be so complex.

    With metta and respect for your obviously superior knowledge,

    Ray
  • AnupassīAnupassī
    edited February 2010
    SECTS, SECTS, SECTS.

    Is that all you people think about?

    (The pun is the very highest form of humor.)
  • ansannaansanna Veteran
    edited February 2010
    Ray, I did not mean any negative to general Buddhism, I just want to mean that buddhist practitioners also need to aware that there are different layer of understanding to the meaning . as they progress in their cultivation

    Just look at any good Buddhist dictionary , they will put forth the general meaning, and the various specific meaning of each teaching

    So that in any discussion , people will not be confused
  • BrotherBobBrotherBob
    edited February 2010
    I'm livin' the dream of bein' part of the western american school of buddhadharma - cuz i ain't now damn furner :poke:

    bubba buddha the main dude, yo!!!
  • BrigidBrigid Veteran
    edited February 2010
    Anupassī wrote: »
    SECTS, SECTS, SECTS.

    Is that all you people think about?

    (The pun is the very highest form of humor.)
    LOL!!
  • RenGalskapRenGalskap Veteran
    edited February 2010
    Anupassi wrote: »
    SECTS, SECTS, SECTS.
    Is that all you people think about?
    (The pun is the very highest form of humor.)
    Yep. I love a girl with a bandha boas.
    (Bandha = bondage to samsara. Bunda boas = nice ass.)
    (If the pun is the very highest form of humor, then the truly obscure pun must be the very highest form of.....intellectual pretension?)
Sign In or Register to comment.