Grand Buddhist worldview, inclusive of other religions

[von bek]

Buddhadasa's book, "Heartwood of the Bodhi Tree" is an excellent read.

 

[Twilight Hue]

You mentioned 4nt, 8fp, etc.

These fall under the heading of Hinayana and relate to individual enlightenment. This is fine, but with Mahayana's focus enlightenment for the sake of sentient beings, there's a whole raft of different practices that come with it.

I think Hinayana is more of an extreme disparagement and insult than anything else. I have nothing more to say about the designation in that regard.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I love Buddhadasa Bhikkhu. His writings on how to understand dependent origination have made a huge impact on my thinking. I do think he goes a little too far in his criticism of Buddhaghosa, however.

Yea. He's certainly was a stuffy pompous straight up old #*$@! *Grin* =0)

 

[Twilight Hue]

Buddhadasa's book, "Heartwood of the Bodhi Tree" is an excellent read.

I'll check it out.

 

[von bek]

Yea. He's certainly was a stuffy pompous straight up old #*$@! *Grin* =0)

Just to be clear, my main issue with Buddhadasa's response to Buddhaghosa is that he questions his personal attainments based upon his teachings and even accuses Buddhaghosa of trying to secretly sneak Hinduism back into Buddhism in subtle ways. Both of these lines of attack are flawed, in my opinion. Aside from these matters, I truly enjoy reading Buddhadasa and feel that he has made important contributions to our understanding of what the Buddha originally taught to his disciples.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Just to be clear, my main issue with Buddhadasa's response to Buddhaghosa is that he questions his personal attainments based upon his teachings and even accuses Buddhaghosa of trying to secretly sneak Hinduism back into Buddhism in subtle ways. Both of these lines of attack are flawed, in my opinion. Aside from these matters, I truly enjoy reading Buddhadasa and feel that he has made important contributions to our understanding of what the Buddha originally taught to his disciples.

It just caused a flashback for me.


Well that explains the extremely brutalish vitrol spewed out between Theravada, Zen, and a number of Buddhist/Hindu practioneers spewed out from the now defunct forum Buddhachat on the subject of Hindu intermixing into Buddhism.

Buddhism/Hinduism debates were not taken kindly there. There were some very nasty exchanges intermixed with some really interesting points on the topic of encroachment of Hindu practices and beliefs under the banner of Buddhism.

I still have some royal scars left over from all that, yet it was hard to pull away at the same time.

I take it was similar with Buddhadasa and Buddhghosa? I wasn't aware of the contention brought about by Buddhadasa.

 

[von bek]

I take it was similar with Buddhadasa and Buddhghosa? I wasn't aware of the contention brought about by Buddhadasa.

Buddhaghosa, the compiler of the commentary, the Path of Purification, was one of the main proponents of the idea that the 12 link chain of dependent origination covers three lifetimes. Buddhadasa strongly rejects this interpretation of the teaching and says it is a way to sneak in the idea that there is a single being undergoing multiple births, contradicting a central teaching of the Buddha. My response is, when you read Buddhaghosa in the Path of Purification, he is not actually saying anything that contradicts anatta. The three lives theory is not saying there is a being undergoing multiple transformations, it is saying that intentions from the past impact the present, while our present cravings influence future arisings. Nothing that controversial, in my opinion.

 

[Osal]

I think Hinayana is more of an extreme disparagement and insult than anything else. I have nothing more to say about the designation in that regard.

Sory to hear!

Consider this: If you feel the use of a word to be so insulting you must express the anger you feel in a very public way, seems to me, and I'm sure others as a veiled attempt to restrict speech that has done nothing to you or anyone save offend what appears to be rather delicate sensibilities.

Also in objecting to the term "Hinayana" you must, in all fairness, object to the term "Mahayana" as well. You must object, because for there to be a "Greater Vehicle", it follows logically, that there must be an attendent Lesser Vehicle as well. It's much the same as in the case of the surname "Junior" there must be a "Senior" too.

So rather than remain petulant, perhaps you should start a new thread and work with our mods to institute and enforce terms that you don't find so ........ irritating ........ and make the rest of us comply.

Sleep well.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

In early Buddhism and the texts of the Tipitaka, we perceive the wheel of samsara (the round of existence, the "universe") vs nibbana (non-"universe")....

A fundamental difficulty here is that the Buddhist teachings on anatta and sunyata don't sit comfortably with the doctrine in other religious traditions.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I think Hinayana is more of an extreme disparagement and insult than anything else.

I think it just reflects the assumption of Mahayana superiority, which is supposed to be bigger and better. Though of course it's as assumption which is only held by Mahayanists, so it's entirely subjective and self-referential.

These claims of superiority are all nonsense of course. Asking which is the "best" Buddhist tradition is like asking which is the "best" painting in an art gallery, it all comes down to personal taste and preference. And of course the school which people end up is more often due to circumstance than any objective assessment of worth based on wider experience and investigation.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Sory to hear!

Consider this: If you feel the use of a word to be so insulting you must express the anger you feel in a very public way, seems to me, and I'm sure others as a veiled attempt to restrict speech that has done nothing to you or anyone save offend what appears to be rather delicate sensibilities.

Also in objecting to the term "Hinayana" you must, in all fairness, object to the term "Mahayana" as well. You must object, because for there to be a "Greater Vehicle", it follows logically, that there must be an attendent Lesser Vehicle as well. It's much the same as in the case of the surname "Junior" there must be a "Senior" too.

So rather than remain petulant, perhaps you should start a new thread and work with our mods to institute and enforce terms that you don't find so ........ irritating ........ and make the rest of us comply.

Sleep well.

I think in light of your response here, it's helpful to provide some education on the term itself. Actually, I would be wholly ignorant myself involving the term hadn't I unwittingly landed smack in the middle of some contentious exchanges to put it mildly. I think it was around 2007 where I got a proper education as to the history, usage, and meaning of Hinayana and consequently avoided using this specific term since.

It's mostly out of respect for fellow Buddhists that this term needs to be avoided to prevent the discussions from being misconstrued and should be layed to rest along with it's early designers whom first coined the term.

Hinayana really, imo has no real place or value in Buddhism nor in any discussions save for those who happen to be unintentionally ignorant, or for those who simply don't care in spite of objections it raises.

Anyways I'll provide some information. I hope it will be enough to address and educate as to it's context and usage as well as the reasons for the contention It brings to people. From Budsas. org

Snippets,

The word Hinayana is not Tibetan, it is not Chinese, English or Bantu. It is Pali and Sanskrit. Therefore, the only sensible approach for finding the meaning of the word, is to study how the word hiinayaana is used in the Pali and Sanskrit texts.

The second element, -yaana, means vehicle. There is no dissent about this.

How then is "hiina" used in the canonical Pali texts?

Every Buddhist knows the first recorded sermon of the Buddha, the Dhammacakkappavattanasutta spoken to the five ascets who became the first five bhikkhus. There the Buddha says: "These two extremes, monks, are not to be practised by one who has gone forth from the world. What are the two? That conjoined with the passions and luxury, low (hiina), coarse, vulgar, ignoble and harmful ..."

Knowing that the sutta style often use strings of synonyms this way, so that they strengthen and define each other, one can regard "coarse, vulgar, ignoble and harmful" as auxiliary definitions of "hiina" in this case.

Here the Buddha clearly denotes the path not to be practised, as hiina.

What then, is Hinayana? Is it Theravada buddhism? No, that is both insulting and historically wrong. Is it a spiritual attitude inside the Mahayana and Vajrayana system? No, that is the Tibetan "theg pa dman pa", the lower capacity attitude, and not the Sanskrit Hinayana, "the inferior vehicle". Therefore, there is no Hinayana. Hinayana is nothing but a myth, although a confused and disruptive one, and wise Buddhists ought to lay that word at rest on the shelves of the Museum of Schisms, where it rightly belongs, and find other words to denote those spiritual attitudes that they wish to define.

Clicky thing below ....

http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha140.htm

 

[buddhist]

I think Hinayana is more of an extreme disparagement and insult than anything else. I have nothing more to say about the designation in that regard.

I take it as a badge of honor I'm taking the small, poor vehicle - the raft of the Buddha.

 

[buddhist]

A fundamental difficulty here is that the Buddhist teachings on anatta and sunyata don't sit comfortably with the doctrine in other religious traditions.

I don't think there's a difficulty, because Buddha stated that the others are still caught in the delusion of self and non-emptiness.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I don't think there's a difficulty, because Buddha stated that the others are still caught in the delusion of self and non-emptiness.

So people in the other religions are deluded? I don't think they'd appreciate being described in that way.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Hinayana really, imo has no real place or value in Buddhism nor in any discussions save for those who happen to be unintentionally ignorant, or for those who simply don't care in spite of objections it raises.

Hinayana is a meaningless term outside the Mahayana, and I've never met a Buddhist who described themselves as being a "Hinayanist".

"Small", "large", it's reminiscent of the male obsession with size,

 

[buddhist]

So people in the other religions are deluded? I don't think they'd appreciate being described in that way.

Perhaps they wouldn't, but didn't the Buddha describe how most people (and deities) are fettered with avidya or moha?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Perhaps they wouldn't, but didn't the Buddha describe how most people are fettered with avidya or moha?

Problems are going to arise if you start projecting Buddhist assumptions onto non-Buddhist traditions. Usually it happens the other way round, of course.

 

[buddhist]

Problems are going to arise if you start projecting Buddhist assumptions onto non-Buddhist traditions. Usually it happens the other way round, of course.

No doubt. That's why my post was mainly intended for internal discussion between Buddhists

 

[Rick O'Shez]

No doubt. That's why my post was mainly intended for internal discussion between Buddhists

I think we should agree that Hinduism is a school of Buddhism, that would be a useful start.

 

[Osal]

So people in the other religions are deluded? I don't think they'd appreciate being described in that way.

Well, sometimes the truth hurts.

Buddhism teaches we're all suffering from delusion, so it's not like Buddhists are somehow better than everyone else in that regard. However, it is human nature to take the higher ground.