Proper context for pejorative words sometimes?

[Ngawang Drolma.]

Theravada means the ‘doctrine of the elders’. The term Hinayana has also been used for this form of Buddhism, but it is a misnomer. This term has been used by the Mahayana Buddhists, who reckoned that they were followers of the ‘greater vehicle’. The Mahayanists to differentiate themselves from the Theravadins called the latter Hinayana, the lesser vehicle. In the pre-Mahayana period there was truly a collateral sect called the Hinayana, but this sect is not the Theravada of today. This confusion was unfortunate, and therefore, it is better to avoid the term Hinayana altogether. Any attempt to label two different forms of Buddhism as ‘greater’ and ‘lesser’ is odious.

--Source

Hi all,

This is confusing to me. The term "Hinayana" was used before the break-up of the Sangha by Theravadan practitioners? What does it mean that the "Hinayana" of that time was different from the Theravada of today?

I've always thought that the term Hinayana was only pejorative. But I once saw Retro mention that there are appropriate uses for the word. Please play nice. I'm not trying to create divisions or open the door for ridiculing Mahayana. I put this in the "Discovering Theravada" section in hopes of just just getting information and clarification.

Thanks muchly,
Drolma

[tiltbillings]

Hinayana, the garbage vehicle, is a construction of the Mahayana. Haven't a clue as what this gentleman is talking about.

Theravada means the ‘doctrine of the elders’. The term Hinayana has also been used for this form of Buddhism, but it is a misnomer. This term has been used by the Mahayana Buddhists, who reckoned that they were followers of the ‘greater vehicle’. The Mahayanists to differentiate themselves from the Theravadins called the latter Hinayana, the lesser vehicle. In the pre-Mahayana period there was truly a collateral sect called the Hinayana, but this sect is not the Theravada of today. This confusion was unfortunate, and therefore, it is better to avoid the term Hinayana altogether. Any attempt to label two different forms of Buddhism as ‘greater’ and ‘lesser’ is odious.

--Source

Hi all,

This is confusing to me. The term "Hinayana" was used before the break-up of the Sangha by Theravadan practitioners? What does it mean that the "Hinayana" of that time was different from the Theravada of today?

I've always thought that the term Hinayana was only pejorative. But I once saw Retro mention that there are appropriate uses for the word. Please play nice. I'm not trying to create divisions or open the door for ridiculing Mahayana. I put this in the "Discovering Theravada" section in hopes of just just getting information and clarification.

Thanks muchly,
Drolma

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Laura,

This is confusing to me. The term "Hinayana" was used before the break-up of the Sangha by Theravadan practitioners?

No, prior to Mahayana, there were other early schools of Buddhism, and Mahayana classified all of these, collectively, as Hinayana. Of these, only the one that went on to be known retrospectively as Theravada, survives today.

What does it mean that the "Hinayana" of that time was different from the Theravada of today?

This just means that what came to be known as Theravada was only one of the 18 (?) earlier schools.

I've always thought that the term Hinayana was only pejorative.

Likewise.

But I once saw Retro mention that there are appropriate uses for the word.

In a solely Mahayana or Vajrayana environment where it can be a handy distinction... but I've also seen Mahayanists and Vajrayanists use alternative expressions which are not pejorative such as Shravakayana or Nikaya Buddhism. Obviously my preference would be for one of the latter two, but it's not really my place to say what other traditions (or religions) should do.

Please play nice. I'm not trying to create divisions or open the door for ridiculing Mahayana. I put this in the "Discovering Theravada" section in hopes of just just getting information and clarification.

If you have any follow up questions, feel free to ask.

Metta,
Retro.

[Ngawang Drolma.]

Thank you both. I had a feeling this was bad info.
Retro I've seen the word Nikaya before but didn't know what it meant. That one's a keeper

Kindly,
Drolma

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Laura,

Retro I've seen the word Nikaya before but didn't know what it meant. That one's a keeper

It points, in essence to those who base their practice on the teachings of the AN, DN, MN, SN & KN.

I suppose that ignores Abhidhamma, but y'know... an improvement on "hinayana".

Metta,
Retro.

[cooran]

Hello Drolma, all,

You may find these articles on "The Term Hinayana from a Theravada Perspective" of interest:

http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index. ... opic=21602

metta
Chris

[Ngawang Drolma.]

AN, DN, MN, SN & KN

Hi Retro Can you help me with decoding please?
It is good to know the exact meaning of Nikaya, thanks.

And Chris, great link! I'll investigate that discussion.

Kindly,
Drolma

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Laura,

Here you go..

The Sutta Pitaka of the Pali Canon
http://www.vipassana.com/canon/sutta.php

Metta,
Retro.

[Ngawang Drolma.]

Greetings Laura,

Here you go..

The Sutta Pitaka of the Pali Canon
http://www.vipassana.com/canon/sutta.php

Metta,
Retro.

Perfect, thanks

Best,
Laura

[Cittasanto]

hinayana was originally used for non-buddhist schools, which aimed at enlightenment such as the Jains, or some Buddhist schools whose existence were the result of Schism, and I think it would be fair to say the middle vheicle could be Arahant aimed schools and greater Vihicle may of been Boddhisattva ideal aimed, or vice versa depending on who was using the term, or hinayana may also of been used for those aiming at some point on the stream lower than Arahant but not the Boddhisatva path.

the 18 or so Schools weren't all due to schisms (the newer school or branch advocating something which is not dhammavinaya would be a schism) but rather a different philosophic emphasis or way to explain something which is a valid and suits some people.

only the Sthaviravada Vinaya liniages remain, the tibetan schools being part of the Sarvastivada recession and china, Taiwan, japan etc being the Dharmaguptaka recession which is the same brach as the theravadan = Vibhajjavāda

if we look at theravada, Mahayana & Vajrayana today, within each group there are sometimes many different nuances in teaching, but none are actually considdered not buddhist, or schismatic groups with the exception of one Tibetan group (NKT) and a Mahayana group or theravadin group but don't remember the name, I don't think there are any groups which could be called propperly any more schism groups and possibly some of the mix and match groups about could bt that is a seperate thing mostly outside of the vinaya recessions so couldn't acctually be classed as such propperly at least I don't think.

I know one monk dissagrees with me on some of these points (outside of this group) and some of this has been peiced to gether from different sources from seperate inquiries but I havn't seen heard etc anything which is verified from more than one persons point of view or source which has convinced me that I am wrong, so if anyone knows of anything which proves anything wrong please let me know! I do love being wrong about this sort of stuff
(bounties will be given depending on how wrong you proove me )

[Cittasanto]

Thank you both. I had a feeling this was bad info.
Retro I've seen the word Nikaya before but didn't know what it meant. That one's a keeper

Kindly,
Drolma

these are reasonable articles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikaya_Buddhism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nik%C4%81ya

[Ben]

Hi Drolma

I remember a couple of years ago Rev. Eijo (from e-sangha) wrote an essay on the historical context of the term Hinayana and the conclusion, which I remember, was that the term always was used as a pejorative.
Kind regards

Ben

[tiltbillings]

hinayana was originally used [by whom?] for non-buddhist schools, which aimed at enlightenment such as the Jains, or some Buddhist schools whose existence were the result of Schism,

Source?

[cooran]

Hello all,

This may be of interest:
"Between the 1st Century B.C. to the 1st Century A.D., the two terms Mahayana and Hinayana appeared in the Saddharma Pundarika Sutra or the Sutra of the Lotus of the Good Law.
About the 2nd Century A.D. Mahayana became clearly defined. Nagarjuna developed the Mahayana philosophy of Sunyata and proved that everything is Void in a small text called Madhyamika-karika. About the 4th Century, there were Asanga and Vasubandhu who wrote enormous amount of works on Mahayana. After the 1st Century AD., the Mahayanists took a definite stand and only then the terms of Mahayana and Hinayana were introduced.

We must not confuse Hinayana with Theravada because the terms are not synonymous. Theravada Buddhism went to Sri Lanka during the 3rd Century B.C. when there was no Mahayana at all. Hinayana sects developed in India and had an existence independent from the form of Buddhism existing in Sri Lanka. Today there is no Hinayana sect in existence anywhere in the world."
http://zencomp.com/greatwisdom/ebud/ebdha125.htm

metta
Chris

[Cittasanto]

Hello all,

This may be of interest:
"Between the 1st Century B.C. to the 1st Century A.D., the two terms Mahayana and Hinayana appeared in the Saddharma Pundarika Sutra or the Sutra of the Lotus of the Good Law.
About the 2nd Century A.D. Mahayana became clearly defined. Nagarjuna developed the Mahayana philosophy of Sunyata and proved that everything is Void in a small text called Madhyamika-karika. About the 4th Century, there were Asanga and Vasubandhu who wrote enormous amount of works on Mahayana. After the 1st Century AD., the Mahayanists took a definite stand and only then the terms of Mahayana and Hinayana were introduced.

We must not confuse Hinayana with Theravada because the terms are not synonymous. Theravada Buddhism went to Sri Lanka during the 3rd Century B.C. when there was no Mahayana at all. Hinayana sects developed in India and had an existence independent from the form of Buddhism existing in Sri Lanka. Today there is no Hinayana sect in existence anywhere in the world."
http://zencomp.com/greatwisdom/ebud/ebdha125.htm

metta
Chris

I have heard that small pockets of Mahayana were around in the early stages of forming within the same monestaries as other schools in india, but I doubt the validity of this remark as being more than an over and under estimate I think it is more likely some early forms of mahayana existed before the actual formation as groups in and of themselves not a cople of monks here and there, more like a couple of monestaries here & there seams likely to me.

[Cittasanto]

hinayana was originally used [by whom?] for non-buddhist schools, which aimed at enlightenment such as the Jains, or some Buddhist schools whose existence were the result of Schism,

Source?

read further

some of this has been peiced to gether from different sources from seperate inquiries

hinayana was originally used [by whom?] [b]

lotus sutta I believe is the first, and chris gives one reference.

[tiltbillings]

Okay.

hinayana was originally used for non-buddhist schools, which aimed at enlightenment such as the Jains, or some Buddhist schools whose existence were the result of Schism, At first was not clear, but is now.