Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

A forum for beginners and members of other Buddhist traditions to ask questions about Theravāda (The Way of the Elders). Responses require moderator approval before they are visible in order to double-check alignment to Theravāda orthodoxy.
0pper
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 6:08 pm

Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by 0pper »

I'm extremely intrigued by Buddhism and am well on my way to becoming Buddhist. I've been reading about it for a long time, but I'm close to making a commitment to becoming a Buddhist. I am now in the stage of choosing what specific path of Buddhism I want to follow.

My understanding is that Theravada Buddhism is closer to what the Buddha actually taught while Mahayana, although also very profound, seems to be influenced very much by others aside from the Buddha himself. Mahayana seems to have more cultural trappings. Things like dieties, divas and spirit worship... well frankly I have no interest in that whatsoever. I was a Christian in my early 20s for 4 years. Been there, done that.

I'm more interested in the practical aspects of Buddhism and less in the religious stuff.

Is Theravada a better fit for me?

What do those who are critical of the Theravada path have to say?
User avatar
Wind
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:10 pm

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Wind »

I chose Theravada because it's closest thing to what the Buddha taught and back by sound reasoning. It does give me the impression that Theravada has less mysticism than what you find in Mahayana Buddhism. Of course Theravada isn't immune to cultural influences but we have the Dhamma to fall back on to set us on the right path.

Whether it is a fit for you is up to you to decide.

Those who are critical of Theravada sometimes say it is a more selfish path since it concern mainly how one is to be liberated whereas Mahayana focus more on liberating all beings. Although that is really a misjudgment on Theravadans. We help others by leading as examples and preserving and spreading what we believe to be the original teaching of the Buddha.
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Cittasanto »

only you can tell if something fits!
try it and see, if you don't like it great, if you do great
this isn't a general Buddhism forum rather a Theravada orientated forum so it isn't likely many if any members would be critical of, or openly critical here for a balanced response base, although do understand there are cultural add ons within Theravada which aren't necesarily in accordance with the teachings.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
BlackBird
Posts: 2069
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:07 pm

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by BlackBird »

0pper wrote: What do those who are critical of the Theravada path have to say?
The only candid criticism I have come across is more focused on Theravadin institutions and individual practitioners rather than Theravada as a doctrine. Within Theravada however there are differences of opinion, interpretations and criticisms of certain methods.
0pper wrote: I'm more interested in the practical aspects of Buddhism and less in the religious stuff.
I think Theravada Buddhism is one of the most practical religions in the world :)

metta
Jack
"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:
'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

Path Press - Ñāṇavīra Thera Dhamma Page - Ajahn Nyanamoli's Dhamma talks
Mukunda
Posts: 295
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 1:54 am

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Mukunda »

0pper wrote:Mahayana seems to have more cultural trappings. Things like dieties, divas and spirit worship... well frankly I have no interest in that whatsoever.
It seems to me that western converts to Mahayana Buddhism tend to be more attracted to cultural trappings than western converts to the Theravada. However, IME native Theravadins are just as focused on deities, devas, and spirits as any one else. I've even seen Theravadin monks perform exorcisms, and a Malaysian friend of mine (born and raised Theravadin) is terrified of ghosts.
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Dan74 »

I think it is impossible to accurately answer this question the way it stands.

In Theravada, there are many strands and teachers. Some are focused more on the scripture, some on meditation, others perform rituals and various cultural functions and don't do much else.

In Mahayana, there are many schools that especially outwardly differ to a huge extent. Some work extensively with deities but this has a very practical purpose (tantra in Tibetan Buddhism), others don't. Even within a given school, emphasis can depend on a teacher (and the student).

So all these preconceptions in my opinion just stand in the way. Go to centres and find out for yourself, would be my advice.
_/|\_
Bankei
Posts: 430
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 4:40 am

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Bankei »

Theravada can be extremely 'religious' - have a look at how it is practiced in Thailand for example.

Or it could be extremely non-religious, like some western (and asian too) approached where it is more like a philosophy with no rituals (temples, priests, bowing, chanting etc) or psychotherapy type of approach.

Similar can be said about the Mahayana too.
-----------------------
Bankei
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Kim OHara »

Dan74 wrote: So all these preconceptions in my opinion just stand in the way. Go to centres and find out for yourself, would be my advice.
Yep. :smile:
Especially since you need to find people you can get on with, close enough to meet with on a regular basis, to help you sustain your commitment and direct your practice.
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by ground »

0pper wrote:I'm more interested in the practical aspects of Buddhism and less in the religious stuff.
How to discern "religious stuff" and "practical aspect"? What may appear to you as "religious stuff" is "practical aspect" (i.e. method) for another.

kind regards
0pper
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 6:08 pm

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by 0pper »

Thank you kindly for the replies. I have definitely learned something.

There is a New Kadampa Tradition Buddhist Centre a few kilometres from my condo. Reading their literature they seem very open to welcoming new comers. I think I'm going to go to a guided meditation class they offer, see where things are at, and take it from there.

Any thoughts on the New Kadampa Tradition?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by tiltbillings »

0pper wrote:Thank you kindly for the replies. I have definitely learned something.

There is a New Kadampa Tradition Buddhist Centre a few kilometres from my condo. Reading their literature they seem very open to welcoming new comers. I think I'm going to go to a guided meditation class they offer, see where things are at, and take it from there.

Any thoughts on the New Kadampa Tradition?
Do some online research. They are not without problems.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Mawkish1983
Posts: 1285
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Mawkish1983 »

Do some online research. They are not without problems.
Even good-old wikipedia has an article about the NKT 'controversies'. I found it a while ago when a collegue asked me about them. The advantage of wikipedia is that it converges towards unbiasedness as more and more people edit the articles. I recommend you take a peek Opper :)

(Edit: My opinion? It's like an arguement between two groups: one insisting a banana is blue the other insisting a banana is red. Meanwhile, the banana is rotting all the same.)
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4529
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Dan74 »

About NKT, it a "new religious movement", some would say a cult. It has a reputation for being exclusivist - people are strongly discouraged from reading (or following) anything outside NKT and classical Gelug (Tsongkapa). It is basically shunned by other Tibetan groups and is on very bad terms with the Dalai Lama over the issue of worshipping a deity which the Dalai Lama (and some other senior lamas) believes to be harmful. This seems to be a major part of their practice.

It is also known for active proselytising and having inexperienced (sometimes abusive) teachers.

Now all this doesn't necessarily mean your particular group is going to be a bad one and you may actually learn some solid basic Buddhism but personally I would stay away.
_/|\_
User avatar
Monkey Mind
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 8:56 pm
Location: Pacific Northwest, USA

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Monkey Mind »

My initial attraction to Theravada (at least the version presented in my Buddhist Studies class) was the "down to Earth" practical presentation. I didn't have to ring a bell 108 times, do a lot of prostrations, or travel hundreds of miles to learn a secret handshake from a teacher who was trained in an Asian temple. Having said that, a few years ago I decided that I had opted out of a lot of the "optional" devotional practices, and that maybe it would be good for my practice to opt into some of those practices. Chanting, dedication of gifts to a Buddha rupa, bringing flowers to temples, observing the Uposatha... So these days my practice seems as religious (superstitious?) as the practices I was trying to avoid in the first place. And the benefit has been a renewed focus, dedication, and motivation. So engage in Buddhism on whatever level will inspire you to practice the most.
"As I am, so are others;
as others are, so am I."
Having thus identified self and others,
harm no one nor have them harmed.

Sutta Nipāta 3.710
Nosta
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 11:15 pm

Re: Is Theravada Less "Religious" than Mahayana?

Post by Nosta »

In my opinion- the opinion of someone with little pratice on meditation and just some bare knowledge on general buddhism - is that actually you may start your practice slowly, without choosing exactly right now your path (and in the end, that path is very similar on many aspects i think). Be it Mahayana or Theravada, you still have the 4 Noble Truths, the 8Fold Path, Kamma concept, Rebirth concept, and Nibbana (i prefer the word "Nibbana", because "Nirvana" has a very strong mystical feeling, in a very Western way) concept. Also, you still have meditation techniques in both paths. Maybe in Mahayana one gives more attention to Karuna/Compassion.
So, why not still reading, studying and pratice things in a general way until you reach a much more strong feeling about your path?

Also, be aware that some schools may be apparently very different from Theravada, like Esoteric Schools and Pure Land School, for example.

But Theravada is still a religious path. Buddhism is religion, whatever the school. Buddhism is not a philosophical way of life. Kamma (or karma) and rebirth, for example, are some of the concepts that makes buddhism a religion. If kamma and rebirth were scientifically accepted, probably we would say that buddhism was a way or philosofy of life, i guess. :-)
Locked