Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Ngawang Drolma. »

A vajrayana practitioner is in the position of a snake in a bamboo tube. It's a quick path up or down and it's easier to fall into the lower realms. Take that as you will. Perhaps it's dangerous, but students are normally guided through a fair amount of preparation for it.

As for the rest of these comments about vajrayana, I don't know what to say :shrug:
Certainly it sounds like it's not Mexicali's personal path.
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Dan74 »

Certainly it sounds like it's not Mexicali's personal path.
Yes.

But saying it is not my path is not the same as confidently dismissing it as unnecessary and potentially dangerous without even giving any justification.

That was all I was trying to say, but I guess it fell on deaf ears.

It is sad to see people continue to harm themselves by this kind of speech.

_/|\_
_/|\_
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Ngawang Drolma. »

As I understand it, passive aggressive means showing aggression via lack of activity. Like procrastination.

:anjali:
User avatar
Mexicali
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:12 pm

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Mexicali »

That's technically correct, but in its day to day, commonly understood meaning, it can also refer to sublimating one's aggression to smarminess. It's reallllllly common on Buddhist message boards, where someone clearly wants to engage you, but needs to hide it behind a veneer of phony wisdom and/or compassion so nobody thinks they're subject to such simple human frailties as, say, disagreement.
"We do not embrace reason at the expense of emotion. We embrace it at the expense of self-deception."
-- Herbert Muschamp
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Ngawang Drolma. »

:offtopic: :oops:
Last edited by Ngawang Drolma. on Mon May 04, 2009 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Ngawang Drolma. »

Content, it might have been a violation of TOS although it wasn't my intent.

:oops:
Last edited by Ngawang Drolma. on Mon May 04, 2009 3:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mexicali
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:12 pm

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Mexicali »

Zen has many of the same problems that Tibetan Buddhism does, in terms of encouraging unethical behavior and promoting teachings the Buddha specifically spoke against, in the name of an esoteric doctrine. Seung Sahn's "beyond lust" excuse for his behavior sits comfortably with the excuses for keeping sacred concubines in Tibet. Zen's support for Japanese nationalism and warfare finds an analogue in Tibet's support of the landed gentry's right to keep slaves. The 'crazy wisdom' commonly found in both has encouraged a lot of people to reject ubaya in favor of seeking some kind of "higher wisdom". People like Osel Tendzin and Richard Baker aren't representative of some kind of fringe cult, they were very mainstream figures working from very orthodox teachings.
"We do not embrace reason at the expense of emotion. We embrace it at the expense of self-deception."
-- Herbert Muschamp
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

Please be mindful of the following from the...

Terms Of Service
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Members are expected to self-moderate, being mindful of the adage that 'behaviour breeds behaviour'. Mutual respect and friendliness should be the basis of all interactions. For the Buddha's teaching on this see the Saleyyaka Sutta.


Surely this topic can be discussed without personal attacks.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Dan74 »

Mexicali wrote:Zen has many of the same problems that Tibetan Buddhism does, in terms of encouraging unethical behavior and promoting teachings the Buddha specifically spoke against, in the name of an esoteric doctrine.
Zen Buddhism is Buddhism and therefore morality (sila) is essential. It is present in the vows, in the teachings and in the practice. See for example:
Stating from 2008, Chan (Zen) Master Sheng Yen's compassion for humanity was further revealed in "the Six Ethics of the Mind Campaign". They are Workplace Ethics, School Ethics, Family Ethics, Living Ethics, Environmental Ethics and Ethics between Ethnic Groups.

He believed that in today's society, chaos in all its manifestations springs from a lack of ethical and moral standards in interpersonal relationships among all walks of life. Thus, everyone scrambles for their rights while forgetting their obligations and duties. "Ethics" means doing one's duties and observing one's role and "morality" means respecting and caring for each other in interpersonal relationships.
Mexicali wrote: Seung Sahn's "beyond lust" excuse for his behavior sits comfortably with the excuses for keeping sacred concubines in Tibet. Zen's support for Japanese nationalism and warfare finds an analogue in Tibet's support of the landed gentry's right to keep slaves.
Yes, Zen (Seon) teachers are human beings and all that that entails. It is unfortunate but I suspect probably not confined to the Zen tradition. What is not correct is to paint everyone with the same brush. The Buddha's immediate disciples had their failings too.
Mexicali wrote: The 'crazy wisdom' commonly found in both has encouraged a lot of people to reject ubaya in favor of seeking some kind of "higher wisdom".
I have no idea what you are talking about here. This is not my experience of Zen, nor something I found in reading classical Zen stories. No crazy wisdom there. Only compassion coupled with deep insight.
Mexicali wrote: People like Osel Tendzin and Richard Baker aren't representative of some kind of fringe cult, they were very mainstream figures working from very orthodox teachings.
I don't know about Osel, but Baker was expelled by his sangha and more recently said the following (in a 1994 interview with Sugata Schneider):
I don't think that the gossipy or official versions of what happened are right, but I feel definitely that if I were back in the situation again as the person I am now, it wouldn't have happened. Which means it's basically my fault. I had a kind of insecurity and self-importance, which I didn't see for a long time, that was a bad dynamic in the community.
Suzuki Roshi had to choose an heir to continue with the Centre. He chose Baker. And Baker screwed up. Does it follow that there is something inherently wrong with Zen? I don't think so.
Mexicali wrote:Dan

You're sanctimonious and passive aggressive. I'm not sure if those are considered "wrong speech" per se, but I find it obnoxious. Someone disagreeing with you doesn't mean they're "harming themselves" or that your oh-so-noble words "fell on deaf ears". You want to address what I specifically said, feel free, but get over yourself.
My attitude to posting is not to be rude but try to stay constructive. Your response above was to me addressing Drolma, who was also a witness to other ill-informed Vajrayana bashing posts, which I find very sad. Simply because people dismiss a venerable tradition which have produced wonderful enlightened teachers whose compassion exceeds anything you or I can imagine. This attitude hurts the person him/herself. You can see or choose not to see. Your business entirely. But sect-bashing and ad hominems are against Terms of Service so please refrain in the future for community's sake. If you need to, you can PM me.

This is not to say that you can't constructively criticise. I responded to your critical comments about Zen, which had some factual support. But when people dismiss entire traditions, it just sounds like extreme hubris and serves no one.

_/|\_
_/|\_
User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by kc2dpt »

Dan74 wrote:
I view vajrayana as mostly unnecessary and potentially dangerous, but most vajrayana Buddhism still has at root the noble truths, noble path, dependent arising, anatta, and self-effort.
the quote above would have some justification if you have crossed to the other shore and have helped others do likewise without vajrayana methods.
This seems to me a silly thing to say, Dan. One does not have to cross to the other shore to have formed a justified opinion that a particular set of practices seem to be unnecessary and potentially dangerous. For example, the Dalai Lama has repeatedly called Shungden practices unnecessary and potentially dangerous and he has also repeated denied having crossed to the other shore.

Since some teachings of Mahayana were not taught by the Buddha 2600 years ago we can justifiably conclude they are unnecessary. Since we see these teachings lead some people into unwholesome behavior we can justifiably conclude they are potentially dangerous.

One doesn't need to have crossed to the other shore to see these things.

That said, Mahayana teachings are clearly helpful and beneficial to many many people and should not be dismissed lightly.

Dan74 wrote:Simply because people dismiss a venerable tradition which have produced wonderful enlightened teachers whose compassion exceeds anything you or I can imagine. This attitude hurts the person him/herself.
Again, this seems to me a very silly thing to say, not to mention sanctimonious and self-righteous. Are you really asserting that picking any tradition other than Vajrayana hurts oneself? :|
- Peter

Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Dan74 »

Peter wrote:
Dan74 wrote:
I view vajrayana as mostly unnecessary and potentially dangerous, but most vajrayana Buddhism still has at root the noble truths, noble path, dependent arising, anatta, and self-effort.
the quote above would have some justification if you have crossed to the other shore and have helped others do likewise without vajrayana methods.
This seems to me a silly thing to say, Dan. One does not have to cross to the other shore to have formed a justified opinion that a particular set of practices seem to be unnecessary and potentially dangerous. For example, the Dalai Lama has repeatedly called Shungden practices unnecessary and potentially dangerous and he has also repeated denied having crossed to the other shore.
This is not a relevant example. Shugden practice is propitiating a spirit - nothing to do with Buddhism at all. Vajrayana tantric practices are squarely aimed at liberation from delusion.
Since some teachings of Mahayana were not taught by the Buddha 2600 years ago we can justifiably conclude they are unnecessary. Since we see these teachings lead some people into unwholesome behavior we can justifiably conclude they are potentially dangerous.
I don't know for a fact what exactly was and was not taught by the Buddha 2600 years ago, but assuming that some teachings came later, this certainly doesn't make them unnecessary. In the sense that to the Buddha's audience some teachings took first priority and to Chinese, Tibetan etc other skillful means may be necessary to achieve the same aims. Some awakened very early in the Buddha's career. Does that make his subsequent teachings unnecessary?

As for being dangerous, anapanasati can be dangerous. Goenka's vipassana can be dangerous. If misapplied. So this is saying nothing. The statement about Vajrayana being unnecessary and potentially dangerous comes across as simply a sectarian slur showing disrespect and a lack of understanding.
That said, Mahayana teachings are clearly helpful and beneficial to many many people and should not be dismissed lightly.
And perhaps, not at all.
Peter wrote:
Dan74 wrote:Simply because people dismiss a venerable tradition which have produced wonderful enlightened teachers whose compassion exceeds anything you or I can imagine. This attitude hurts the person him/herself.
Again, this seems to me a very silly thing to say, not to mention sanctimonious and self-righteous. Are you really asserting that picking any tradition other than Vajrayana hurts oneself? :|
I said:
Dan wrote:people dismiss a venerable tradition which have produced wonderful enlightened teachers whose compassion exceeds anything you or I can imagine. This attitude hurts the person him/herself.
Of course I did not mean "that picking any tradition other than Vajrayana hurts oneself." I am not a Vajrayana practitioner myself. It is the dismissive attitude that is harmful.

It is my unfortunate karma to have to stand up to it. :cry:

I am off to bed.

_/|\_
_/|\_
User avatar
Ngawang Drolma.
Posts: 805
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:38 pm

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Ngawang Drolma. »

What I'm hearing from Dan is also a reminder that harsh words can harm the speaker even more than the listener.

:anjali:
User avatar
christopher:::
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:56 am

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by christopher::: »

Hi guys. The original question was: "Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?"

So far it sounds like very few Theravada practitioners have answered yes. On the other hand, perhaps if we asked "Has the perspective of certain Mahayana texts or teachers ever been useful to you?" we'd get a more positive response, from many here.

I could be wrong. It's just a hunch.

:namaste:
"As Buddhists, we should aim to develop relationships that are not predominated by grasping and clinging. Our relationships should be characterised by the brahmaviharas of metta (loving kindness), mudita (sympathetic joy), karuna (compassion), and upekkha (equanimity)."
~post by Ben, Jul 02, 2009
User avatar
Mexicali
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:12 pm

Re: Is Mahayana perspective useful for Theravada practitioners?

Post by Mexicali »

Yes, Zen (Seon) teachers are human beings and all that that entails. It is unfortunate but I suspect probably not confined to the Zen tradition. What is not correct is to paint everyone with the same brush. The Buddha's immediate disciples had their failings too.
Of course there were early Buddhists who did bad things. The difference is, they were expected to recognize this. The teacher having sexual indiscretions with the student is not at issue for me; it's the matter of excusing this by trying to claim that one's enlightened status somehow made it acceptable.
I have no idea what you are talking about here. This is not my experience of Zen, nor something I found in reading classical Zen stories. No crazy wisdom there. Only compassion coupled with deep insight.
No Zen crazy wisdom? I don't even know what to say. Western Zen especially is practically a crazy wisdom clearinghouse.
Simply because people dismiss a venerable tradition which have produced wonderful enlightened teachers whose compassion exceeds anything you or I can imagine. This attitude hurts the person him/herself.
Gee, thanks for the concern Dan. Cos I'm sure you really are just worried about me harming myself.
I don't know about Osel
That would be Trungpa's succesor, who gave several people HIV/AIDS because he was under the belief that his advanced tantras would prevent him from transferring it. Oops! His own teacher liked the shaggin a bit too. And forceably stripping people. And drinking so much it nearly killed him on a couple occasions. But just because the Buddha said not to do all this stuff doesn't mean a Buddhist shouldn't, I guess. Skillful means works in mysterious ways!
It is my unfortunate karma to have to stand up to it.
Yeah, and your medal will be here any day now. Seriously, listen to yourself here.
This is not a relevant example. Shugden practice is propitiating a spirit - nothing to do with Buddhism at all. Vajrayana tantric practices are squarely aimed at liberation from delusion.
Yeah, like sexing up young girls in mountain temples, fire rituals, and all that stuff. It's wrong and sectarian to dismiss that, but it's okay to be critical of Shugden practitioners.
"We do not embrace reason at the expense of emotion. We embrace it at the expense of self-deception."
-- Herbert Muschamp
Post Reply