Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

I've recently started my research and desire to practice Buddhism but I came across a dilemma and I'm not sure the significance or the importance of choosing one. I've come across different opinions via internet but I would like to ask here Are these 2 branches similar and what is the differences. I was thinking I should research both and see what resonates more is this wise? Blessings and peace Paul

Hi Paubear,
Welcome aboard!

paulbear wrote:I've recently started my research and desire to practice Buddhism but I came across a dilemma and I'm not sure the significance or the importance of choosing one. I've come across different opinions via internet but I would like to ask here Are these 2 branches similar and what is the differences. I was thinking I should research both and see what resonates more is this wise? Blessings and peace Paul

starting with what resonates more with you to start is (in my opinion) better than going with the flow of everyone else. it could be the more popular opinion with those you ask, yet not really suitable. Although after saying that, that does not mean both are equal or one is better than the other, only that with either you choose you should be circumspect about where it is leading you as either can be held wrongly.

The practice of the Dhamma should lead to peace, calm, and fewer entaglements (although this doesn't mean fewer participations with things).

Good luck in your search and whatever side you opt to start with don't ignore others advise.

I practice in the Theravada tradition, but from time to time I visit Zen or Shambala etc. centers for some excellent discussions and teachings. No one has ever "carded" me, demanded that I pledge loyalty or asked me to leave. I guess my point is, try a variety of centers and see which is the best fit for you. If you like the teachings provided and the community that gathers, then you found a good place.

Before being a theravada buddhist, I was a tibetan buddhist.

The advice I have is for you not to believe when someone says that this vehicle is faster than the other vehicle. That was the reason I prefered tibetan buddhism: because of its autoproclaimed superiority both in speed and in the sense that those who practice vajrayana are of superior capacities.

Once you take this nonsense out of the way, just choose the one that is more truthful in your opinion. Joining a religion is not just about choosing what one likes. It's also about choosing what is true, even if it is at times unpleasant. Of course it's important to feel confortable in your religion otherwise you'll probably leave it.

Thank you for the responses, I truly appreciate the feedback. Paul

You should ask yourself what is your goal? If you want to relax, whatever will be good.

If you want to find the truth, or if you already knew the goal of the Buddhism and want to achieve it. Start at wherever you want, Theravada or Mahayana is not important, it is yourself that matter. You should keep your mind opened, hear different people, traditions, carefully and wisely try to follow them, compare them and learn from it. If you keep the right direction, wherever you started, you still will go to the finish.

Let be the follower of the truth in whatever form it is, than a follower of a tradition. Be fair and calm and keep your mind open

I think people have given very good replies and avoided generalising about either one of the schools.

While Theravada is certainly no monolith and teachers' styles in particular differ widely, Mahayana is even more of a motley crew not even being one school but an umbrella term for many schools. Plus these days there are also hybrids like Theravada/Zen (Subhana Barzaghi), Theravada/Dzogchen (Joseph Goldstein), Zen/Dzogchen (Denko Mortensen) to name just a few.

From my perspective it is important to find a reputable teacher, check him/her out personally and commit to the practice. You might find out that 20 years down the track you change, but it won't be time wasted, that's for sure.

Dan74 wrote:I think people have given very good replies and avoided generalising about either one of the schools.

While Theravada is certainly no monolith and teachers' styles in particular differ widely, Mahayana is even more of a motley crew not even being one school but an umbrella term for many schools. Plus these days there are also hybrids like Theravada/Zen (Subhana Barzaghi), Theravada/Dzogchen (Joseph Goldstein), Zen/Dzogchen (Denko Mortensen) to name just a few.

From my perspective it is important to find a reputable teacher, check him/her out personally and commit to the practice. You might find out that 20 years down the track you change, but it won't be time wasted, that's for sure.

I would agree with all that but my priorities have to be slightly different. I live in a smallish (by world standards) provincial city so there are not many groups within four hours' drive of me and I simply have to go with the best local group (nice people, meeting regularly) regardless of affiliation. That's one of the reasons I'm here, actually - to balance what they think is important with what I think is important.


Kim

Check out my article on the various types of vehicles (yāna) in vogue these days.

Nanayana - Many and Various Doctrines

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Check out my article on the various types of vehicles (yāna) in vogue these days.

Nanayana - Many and Various Doctrines

Since this is the Dhamma-ending age, there are a lot of false teachings about. Take care that what you study and practise is the genuine teaching of the Buddha.

The article seems to be roughly comprehensive; in terms of the OP, the underlined portion really does bar Mahayana from serious consideration, but I'm not one to think Buddhist ecumenism is helpful - much too much chaff gets into the grain.

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Check out my article on the various types of vehicles (yāna) in vogue these days.

Nanayana - Many and Various Doctrines

Hi Venerable,

I see nothing but dukkha in that article, which I think isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's what makes up the first noble truth, after all... it's one of the only two things which will lead to a noble path of practice, with the other being the cessation.

Hopefully the readers will make a good use of it in their practices.

In my humble and frank opinion, Theravada and Zen Buddhism are the only Buddhisms worth researching.

From my shallow observation;
Theravada practitioners are mostly Buddhists who are yet to let go of their agnostic or atheistic view. While Mahayana guides Buddhists who still fancy faithful traditions and rituals.
It is more like Atheism vs Pagansim with the help of Buddha's footsteps.

As long as the 4noble truths and noble 8fold path are primary, different practitioners still end up achieving equal illumination.

barcsimalsi wrote:From my shallow observation;
Theravada practitioners are mostly Buddhists who are yet to let go of their agnostic or atheistic view. While Mahayana guides Buddhists who still fancy faithful traditions and rituals.
It is more like Atheism vs Pagansim with the help of Buddha's footsteps.

I never thought of it that way. My first impulse is to argue and disagree, but... Sometimes stereotypes are based on the science of repeated observation and confirmation, and this statement sums up my experiences.

I would go with Theravada first in either cases. I believe Theravada-tradition has the best teachings about karma.