About Hinayana, Mahayana and Tantra

[Nitiananda]

In India, in ancient times, there was a tradition to arrange reriodic disputes whose school is better. And it was quite a dangerous thing, because the loser himself, the teacher and all the pupils became disciples of the winner. And since the Hinayana followers repeatedly lost those who practiced more advanced teachings, they locked themselves in just for island, and all of the original Hinayana Buddhism was driven out of India by more advanced Mahayana and Tantra-Vajrayana teachings brought to Tibet Padmasambava, Asankaya, Tsonkapa, and others.

As history proves again and again.
The winning party isn't always the in the "right".

I doubt todays theravada has much to do with early buddhism as Mahajana or other schools of thought/experience.

The Bodhisattva path is admirable.But not everyone's cup of tea.
Stages of liberation more or lesser liberated is a funny concept to me.

Freedom from suffering is freedom from suffering whether experienced with the intend to teach or not. Whether one waits to leave samsara until everybody has attained liberation or not.

With Love
Eelco

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

I am mostly interested in how something as basic and clear as the Pali canon. becomes something so "hidden, esoteric and convoluted" as the rites and rituals of the greater vehicles.

Now not wanting to argue or get into heated debates about the subject.
The Satipatthana sutta may be a nice starting point.

With Love
Eelco

If you look at history they were all around at the same times. Living together in the same monastery’s even.

Just different levels of teachings.

Originally Posted by jonesboy

If you look at history they were all around at the same times. Living together in the same monastery’s even.

Just different levels of teachings.

Yes, but that didn't last did it.
The names themselves Mahayana and Hinayana seem to be invented (possibly after the fact) to enforce a split between schools of thought.

I believe/have faith that the Pali canon comes closest to what the buddha actually taught.
The fact that some monks later viewed the bodhisatva path as more "enlightened" or desirable in terms of doing good has no significance in the ability to become liberated from suffering.

WIth Love
Eelco

[Shivani Devi]

Not knowing much about Buddhism and everything about "Journey to the West'...didn't the distinction between Hinayana and Mahayana Buddhism have something to do with three baskets of teachings carried from China to India along the Silk Road trading route and included a monkey spirit, a pig spirit and a fish spirit somewhere in there?

I don't know..
Haven't heard that story.. But I am no scholar..

With Love
Eelco

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

I don't know..
Haven't heard that story.. But I am no scholar..

With Love
Eelco

Buddhists call it the Tripitaka.

It is a famous Chinese story written by Wu' Cheng 'En in the 14th Century and was made into a TV program I loved to watch as a child called "Monkey"....

"In the Worlds before Monkey, primal chaos reigned. Heaven sought order, but the phoenix can fly only when it's feathers are grown. The four worlds formed again and yet again as endless aeons wheeled and passed. Time and the essence of the earth, the moisture of the sun and the moon all worked upon a certain rock...old as creation and it became magically fertile...that first egg was named 'thought'...Tathagata Buddha...the father Buddha said "with our thoughts, we make the world"...elementary forces caused the egg to hatch...from it, then came a stone monkey...the nature of monkey was...irrepressible!"

My memory isn't that bad. lol

Cool..

I've only heard the tripitaka used as meaning the three baskets.
The vinaya-pitaka(monk rules)
The sutta-pitaka(the teachings/discourses of the buddha)
and a later addition the Abidhama-pitaka.(a comprehensive text explaining the workings of the mind in detail)

Those three baskets of rules, teachings and insights are what make up the Pali canon.

With Love
Eelco

[Nitiananda]

Originally Posted by catsquotl

.

I believe/have faith that the Pali canon comes closest to what the buddha actually taught.
The fact that some monks later viewed the bodhisatva path as more "enlightened" or desirable in terms of doing good has no significance in the ability to become liberated from suffering.

WIth Love
Eelco

It's not a matter of faith which doctrine is more great. And you yourself ponder. Who is more great: The one who sits in his corner (monastery) quietly there that studies soothes his consciousness .. and believes that he moves somewhere (to higher worlds) Or that who deliberately destroying worldly desire and calming the mind goes and sacrifices this state of calming the mind and its energy for the benefit of all living beings?
Practitioners of Mahayana are in fact more broad-minded and soulful and conscious.
And if you were in India or Tibet, you immediately noticed that the monasteries of practicing mahayana are richer. Because the laymen naturally sacrifice money for them. And the Hinayanki hiding from all eternally live in starvation.
And according to the level of achievement and the supernatural forces, practitioners of Mahayana or Tantra Vajrayana are always several orders of magnitude stronger. Because the driving force in practice is the merit of saving sentient beings. Practitioners of Hinayana do not bother to spread the law and are given little by the law of karma.
Opposite the spreading Dammu Gods or more advanced practitioners will give you a more perfect law and raise your level of achievement. They will pour in the holy energy that you have spent for others for their sake.
This is the secret of the great path of Boddisattva. And the guarantee of their success.
Buddha Sakyamuni disseminated the teachings, accumulated merit and practiced after attaining the level of samadhi and gaining 6 divine abilities, four asanjakas and 100 thousand kalpas. This period of time is close to infinity.
Therefore, the initiation (transmission of energy and data) from such a soul simply led very quickly to achieve the liberation of all who were nearby.
Here I am talking about the importance of a true master capable of giving such initiations.

Right, and this is convincing how exactly?
I do like the way that you seem to know how I visualize monks sitting in a corner. Or that a monasteries wealth is somehow indicative of the "rightfulness" of their teachings..

From my understanding the richer a person or group/monestarie the better they sell the lies and indoctrinate the believers into giving.

I've seen few theravadan monestaries for instance give a directive to what " normal" Dana should be. It could be just my location on this planet. But I've seen plenty mahayana centers ask for a fee + dana, which also has a guideline price attached.

But then what do I know..
To be clear. I don't ponder which is greater. I have pondered which teachings come closer to the way I experience spirituality. Mahayana in that regard for me feels more like organised religion, where Theravada is more an individual attainable path..

Nothing wrong with either, However if one comes barging in exclaiming that his way is the only way and everything else is somehow lesser or lower or wrong in the way you seem to do.. Well that tickles my lets give some pushback response.

With Love
Eelco