Reunify the Buddhism, is there any way?

[whynotme]

Hi everyone,

I think most of us Buddhists want to see the unification of Buddhism, and if such a thing can be done it will bring massive merit for ones who did it. Is there any way to make the job done? What should everyone do?

Regards

[SDC]

What should everyone do?

Don't go overboard in threads about sensitive topics such as sectarianism between the different Buddhist schools?

Don't fret, I did it once...maybe twice.

[mfesmith]

Hi everyone,

I think most of us Buddhists want to see the unification of Buddhism, and if such a thing can be done it will bring massive merit for ones who did it. Is there any way to make the job done? What should everyone do?

Regards

Buddha Dharma is already unified. Buddhists simply need to drop their "isms" and then it will be taken care of.

In other words, there are a variety of approaches to the problem of dealing with the afflictions which cause rebirth in samsara.

The Nikaya approach is the NET, the Mahāyāna approach is the five paths and ten stages, the latter two approaches are more mentally oriented.

The Vajrayāna approach take a different direction, and understands how both afflictive consciousness and the release from those consciousness, as well as dhyānas, samadhis and so on are bound up in the interrelationship of various cittas with their corresponding physiological bases in channels and cakras. Among other things, it is predicated on reversing the dependent origination of the formation of the body based on how an afflicted consciousness appropriates a body at conception.

It does not matter what approach one takes, as long as one understands the essentials are the same i.e. there is affliction, this causes karma, that results in suffering. Remove affliction, karma does not come to be and suffering ceases.

It is that simple. There are variety of approaches to this issue. Be grateful it is so.

Then you will cease being a "Buddhist", attached to sect and an identity, and become a practitioner of Buddhadharma.

M

[daverupa]

the essentials are the same i.e. there is affliction, this causes karma, that results in suffering.

Isn't this sort of the problem? By which I mean, thinking in terms of "the essentials" means the non-essentials, however framed, are treated as potentially or actually deleterious additions, which renders sectarian feuding.

Alternatively, the mode of thinking here is that the essentials are necessary, but not sufficient; these... various flavors, shall we say, are what brings these essentials up to the level of sufficiency, something they otherwise lack. But this admits of comparative evaluations which can still render denigration of the other, in addition to suggesting that the Dhamma is insufficient without one or another of these flavors.

Another option is to see the various flavors as unnecessary, but since they are not obstacles one or another flavor helps the medicine go down. If this is the case, the problem is for any fan of one flavor to say that flavor is the True Flavor. (But then what flavor was pre-sectarian buddhadhamma? It seems that one assumption here is that this first flavor has been discontinued...)

[anjali]

...Is there any way to make the job done?...
Regards

Realistically...no. Once divisions (both doctrinal and ritual) are firmly established, there is no going back. I can't think of any world religion where major sectarian groups dropped their differences and reunified.

[daverupa]

...Is there any way to make the job done?...
Regards

Realistically...no. Once divisions (both doctrinal and ritual) are firmly established, there is no going back. I can't think of any world religion where major sectarian groups dropped their differences and reunified.

There are other models, potentially. Within the Catholic Church, there are liturgical Rites which celebrate the liturgy in various ways, but all of them are considered to be in communion with one another, as contrasted with the Protestant Churches. A similar thing for Buddhism would involve mutual recognition of the validity of Vinaya ordinations, which is probably a much better way to approach this issue than via doctrine.

[Cittasanto]

Hi everyone,

I think most of us Buddhists want to see the unification of Buddhism, and if such a thing can be done it will bring massive merit for ones who did it. Is there any way to make the job done? What should everyone do?

Regards

Personally no, I do not want to see that; I want to see the true Dhamma!

Don't worry about it, there are many flavours of the same thing, and some of these flavours may not be palitable for every one or incorrect.
find what is best suited for you. work-out what is best for your well-being.

[Ñāṇa]

Buddha Dharma is already unified. Buddhists simply need to drop their "isms" and then it will be taken care of.

In other words, there are a variety of approaches to the problem of dealing with the afflictions which cause rebirth in samsara.

The Nikaya approach is the NET, the Mahāyāna approach is the five paths and ten stages, the latter two approaches are more mentally oriented.

The Vajrayāna approach take a different direction, and understands how both afflictive consciousness and the release from those consciousness, as well as dhyānas, samadhis and so on are bound up in the interrelationship of various cittas with their corresponding physiological bases in channels and cakras. Among other things, it is predicated on reversing the dependent origination of the formation of the body based on how an afflicted consciousness appropriates a body at conception.

It does not matter what approach one takes, as long as one understands the essentials are the same i.e. there is affliction, this causes karma, that results in suffering. Remove affliction, karma does not come to be and suffering ceases.

It is that simple. There are variety of approaches to this issue. Be grateful it is so.

Then you will cease being a "Buddhist", attached to sect and an identity, and become a practitioner of Buddhadharma.

Indeed.

[ground]

Hi everyone,

I think most of us Buddhists want to see the unification of Buddhism, and if such a thing can be done it will bring massive merit for ones who did it.

IMO there should remain a variety of buddhisms for all kinds of people in the same way as there should remain a variety of religions in general. Unification would end up in suppression.

Kind regards

[David N. Snyder]

Even if "reunification" were possible it would only last a few minutes or days, weeks at the most. This is because there will be divisions once again on how each person interprets the new doctrine, that was 'set-in-stone' so to speak.

Attempts at 'Buddhayana' schools have mostly failed and in the end become just another division, another 'denomination' just as in Christianity the non-denominational version is just another denomination in the end.

In Theravada we are perhaps more 'united' than Mahayana, with fewer differences and variations (not implying any superiority) with our focus on the Pali Canon. Yet even in Theravada there are some different approaches and variations and sometimes even some bitter fights, for example the bhikkhuni issue.

It would be nice if there were only one Dhamma / Dharma, but that is not the case and as time goes on we can only expect further divisions with new interpretations cropping up. It is no wonder, then that the Dhamma eventually gets too diluted and dies out . . . just as the Buddha stated.

In the meantime and in the more positive, we can consider these different schools as different approaches, for different temperaments and interests of the practitioners.

[Vlcimba]

There is no need to reunify it. It is already unified . The best thing we should do is respect the other divisions , do not be a smart-ass and try to question and criticize the other divisions. Your intention was good, but this would lead to divisions questioning each others differences, like in the previous threads . Stick to your own teachings . Just go with the division that's suit you best. You don't need to be a hero trying to reunite bddhism. The best thing you can do is just try not to question or criticize the other divisions, I have seen you croticizing the mahayanists a lot in the other thread　. Please, learn to respect them. Noone wants a war between divisions like how Catholic popes tried to eliminate the Protestants back then.

[whynotme]

Many thanks, you guys seem well informed

OK, it seems to be unrealistic. The vinaya tells the similar issue (at much smaller scale) when there was disunion in the sangha: The monks said to others, this is dhamma, that is not dhamma, this is patimokkha, that is not patimokkha. And they create ally with monks with similar view, even the Buddha couldn't teach them so he left and lived alone in the forest. After that the Buddha taught about how to deal with it, for monks and lay people as well. Just for curiosity, has anyone here read it?

Regards

[whynotme]

What should everyone do?

Don't go overboard in threads about sensitive topics such as sectarianism between the different Buddhist schools?

Don't fret, I did it once...maybe twice.

You have the gut,

Well, I think sensitive sectarianism make Buddhism like a bunch of ill men (joke). The Buddha taught us about dealing with massive pain physical or mental, dealing with life and death, dealing with non buddhists with weapon and hostile attitude. Then suddenly we crumbled like children when talking about sects.

Regards

[Dan74]

I think the disunion, when it happens, is due to our defilements, like pride, and this is what we should all be working on.

One of my best friends is Theravadan, of Sri Lankan origin. She has been open-minded enough to go on Zen retreats with me and has developed deep respect for the Mahayana while staying with her Theravada practice. I see no friction and no disunion - we are not all clones, so it makes sense that due to our different backgrounds and personalities, we find ourselves on somewhat different paths. As long as we respect each other's path, there is no cause for concern. This respect comes from exposure, I guess. And when one does not have the time or the inclination for this exposure, it is best not to pass any judgment one way or another.

As for your recent threads, I didn't get offended at all. Your opinions were misinformed but you came across to me like a well-meaning person who was also willing to listen. In any case all the best for your practice.

[whynotme]

Thank you Dan,

Just a note, I don't call myself a Therevadin or Mahayanist. If I need to name myself, I am just a follower, a student of the Buddha. If Theravada teaches me smt, I look at it carefully, is it compatible with dhamma, with suttas, with vinaya? Does it lead to wisdom, giving up, peace? I tried my best and if it doesn't meet the standard then I reject it, either Theravada or Mahayana or from a well known teacher. If it lead to peace, wisdom, compatible with dhamma, suttas, vinaya, while it is from science, Christian, Muslim, atheism, I accept it and try to encourage others doing it, even he is Christian, atheism or whatever.

Regards

[reflection]

Divisions only exist in the mind. You could either say there is one type of Buddhism or there are millions of types of Buddhism, or anything in between. All is true on another level. So if you want to unify Buddhism, you can! At least, that's how I see it.

If you want to see just one interpretation of the dhamma, everybody who practiced the dhamma would have to be enlightened obviously. But I don't think that will happen any time soon. And even then, the path can be represented in a multiple of ways.

[whynotme]

...Is there any way to make the job done?...
Regards

Realistically...no. Once divisions (both doctrinal and ritual) are firmly established, there is no going back. I can't think of any world religion where major sectarian groups dropped their differences and reunified.

There are other models, potentially. Within the Catholic Church, there are liturgical Rites which celebrate the liturgy in various ways, but all of them are considered to be in communion with one another, as contrasted with the Protestant Churches. A similar thing for Buddhism would involve mutual recognition of the validity of Vinaya ordinations, which is probably a much better way to approach this issue than via doctrine.

I totally agree, I respect and consider all branches as Buddhism because of their vinaya and ordination. It is a biggest common thing across Buddhism

Regards

PS: also vinaya seems to be the last thing exists when all other things like suttas disappeared, according to vinaya itself

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

As long as we respect each other's path, there is no cause for concern.

Agreed.

And I'd also like to suggest this is true not only with respect to Theravada & Mahayana, but when the scope is reduced to within Theravada itself, or extended towards all legitimate spiritual traditions as well.

King Asoka also agreed, and had the following inscription made...

Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, honors both ascetics and the householders of all religions, and he honors them with gifts and honors of various kinds. But Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, does not value gifts and honors as much as he values this — that there should be growth in the essentials of all religions. Growth in essentials can be done in different ways, but all of them have as their root restraint in speech, that is, not praising one's own religion, or condemning the religion of others without good cause. And if there is cause for criticism, it should be done in a mild way. But it is better to honor other religions for this reason. By so doing, one's own religion benefits, and so do other religions, while doing otherwise harms one's own religion and the religions of others. Whoever praises his own religion, due to excessive devotion, and condemns others with the thought "Let me glorify my own religion," only harms his own religion. Therefore contact (between religions) is good. One should listen to and respect the doctrines professed by others. Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, desires that all should be well-learned in the good doctrines of other religions.

Those who are content with their own religion should be told this: Beloved-of-the-Gods, King Piyadasi, does not value gifts and honors as much as he values that there should be growth in the essentials of all religions. And to this end many are working — Dhamma Mahamatras, Mahamatras in charge of the women's quarters, officers in charge of outlying areas, and other such officers. And the fruit of this is that one's own religion grows and the Dhamma is illuminated also.

Metta,
Retro.

[suttametta]

Buddha Dharma is already unified. Buddhists simply need to drop their "isms" and then it will be taken care of.

In other words, there are a variety of approaches to the problem of dealing with the afflictions which cause rebirth in samsara.

The Nikaya approach is the NET, the Mahāyāna approach is the five paths and ten stages, the latter two approaches are more mentally oriented.

The Vajrayāna approach take a different direction, and understands how both afflictive consciousness and the release from those consciousness, as well as dhyānas, samadhis and so on are bound up in the interrelationship of various cittas with their corresponding physiological bases in channels and cakras. Among other things, it is predicated on reversing the dependent origination of the formation of the body based on how an afflicted consciousness appropriates a body at conception.

It does not matter what approach one takes, as long as one understands the essentials are the same i.e. there is affliction, this causes karma, that results in suffering. Remove affliction, karma does not come to be and suffering ceases.

It is that simple. There are variety of approaches to this issue. Be grateful it is so.

Then you will cease being a "Buddhist", attached to sect and an identity, and become a practitioner of Buddhadharma.

M

These are some very neat little categories. You've got your Nikayism, your Mahayanism and your Vajrayanism. Nope. No isms in this list.

There's no need to unify anything. Everything is up for grabs and completely open to scrutiny and reevaluation. Just as it always has been.

[danieLion]

When was Buddhism ever unified?