Can we bridge the two vehicles?

[davidbrainerd]

All the present Buddhist vehicles are missing a wheel or two, or maybe in worse shape.

[SarathW]

What we have is the old drum with few new pegs.
I think it still plays well even though it is not sound as good as when Buddha was playing it.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Nice one Sarath!



Metta,
Paul.

[Aloka]

What we have is the old drum with few new pegs.
I think it still plays well even though it is not sound as good as when Buddha was playing it.

I'm reminded of SN20.7:

Ani Sutta: The Peg

Staying at Savatthi. "Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained. [1]

"In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.

"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.

"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

[Jojola]

But, of course compassion is a key part of the teachings...

Indeed I don't disagree, so long as our compassion for others is an impetus to act on the responsibility to ourselves of our own enlightenment and not theirs, because no ones practice is anyone else's responsibility to take on (At least that's what I get out of the Sedaka Sutta, I'll post below for reference) and I feel the Mahayanas bodhisattva ideal is opposed to that, unless there's something I don't know or understand about their main goal?

I do want to say the Mahayanas strong emphasis on compassion is a quality of them that does 'warm my heart' a great deal, I do have an excerpt of a Mahayana sutra in my room, I also like Milarepa as well (the saint of the Vajrayana, which I think is considered a tantric development from Mahayana), a lot of essential dhamma is in The Hundred Thousand Songs of Milarepa; so I hope I don't come off as a Theravada puritan, I'm always for progressive attitudes, I just think vigilance is necessary to preserve the genuine dhamma and its essence which is a call for each individual to seek liberation for themselves (which I believe Milarepa did).

Sedaka Sutta
[The Buddha addressed the monks:]
Once upon a time, monks, a bamboo acrobat,
setting himself upon his bamboo pole,
addressed his assistant Medakathalika:
"Come you, my dear Medakathalika,
and climbing up the bamboo pole,
stand upon my shoulders."
"Okay, master" the assistant Medakathalika
replied to the bamboo acrobat;
and climbing up the bamboo pole
she stood on the master's shoulders.

So then the bamboo acrobat said this to his assistant Medakathalika:
"You look after me, my dear Medakathalika, and I'll look after you.
Thus with us looking after one another, guarding one another,
we'll show off our craft, receive some payment,
and safely climb down the bamboo pole."

This being said, the assistant Medakathalika said this to the bamboo acrobat:
"That will not do at all, master!
You look after yourself, master, and I will look after myself.
Thus with each of us looking after ourselves, guarding ourselves,
we'll show off our craft, receive some payment,
and safely climb down from the bamboo pole.
That's the right way to do it!"

[The Buddha said:]
Just like the assistant Medakathalika said to her master:
"I will look after myself,"
so should you, monks, practice the establishment of mindfulness.
You should (also) practice the establishment of mindfulness (by saying)
"I will look after others."

Looking after oneself, one looks after others.
Looking after others, one looks after oneself.

And how does one look after others by looking after oneself?
By practicing (mindfulness), by developing (it), by doing (it) a lot.
And how does one look after oneself by looking after others?
By patience, by non-harming, by loving kindness, by caring (for others).
(Thus) looking after oneself, one looks after others;
and looking after others, one looks after oneself.

Excerpt from translators note (Olendzki):
The story is telling us that ultimately we are responsible for our own balance, and would be foolish to direct our attention to others while neglecting our own inner focus. And yet others are directly affected by how well we do this. Insight meditation is not a selfish undertaking, because the quality of our interaction with all those around us depends on the degree of our own self-understanding and self-control.

[Santi253]

They already have been.

Basic points unifying Theravāda and Mahāyāna

Thank you for sharing this. As one can see in this important doctrinal statement, accepted by authorities and teachers in both Mahayana and Theravada, there is no need for members of these respective groups to attempt to convert each other to their particular sect or school of Buddhism.

It is only by acknowledging what we share in common that we can respect each other as disciples of the Buddha.

We need not "merge" sects and schools in order to have this mutual respect, especially since the historical Buddha taught different things to different people in different circumstances:
https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title= ... amma_doors

May you be happy and well.

[form]

If it is focusing on what both schools agree on, it is possible, but there are much more differences than common.

[chownah]

I think that on the path to the goal that both vehicles must be abandoned.
chownah

[form]

I think that on the path to the goal that both vehicles must be abandoned.
chownah

Everything conditioned has to be abandoned, you are quite right.

[Goofaholix]

Bridging two vehicles strikes me as something you'd see in a Mad Max movie, not recommended.

Better to have a vehicle that is reliable, fits within your budget, is the right size for your needs, and gets good gas mileage.

Having equipped yourself with such a suitable vehicle it doesn't mean that you can't learn from or be inspired by the drivers of other vehicles, there's just no need to get up on the roof and straddle them both.

[Kim OHara]

They already have been.

Basic points unifying Theravāda and Mahāyāna

Thank you for sharing this. As one can see in this important doctrinal statement, accepted by authorities and teachers in both Mahayana and Theravada, there is no need for members of these respective groups to attempt to convert each other to their particular sect or school of Buddhism.

It is only by acknowledging what we share in common that we can respect each other as disciples of the Buddha.

We need not "merge" sects and schools in order to have this mutual respect, especially since the historical Buddha taught different things to different people in different circumstances:
https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title= ... amma_doors

May you be happy and well.

This seems to me to be the most appropriate way of looking at the division.
Each of the paths has such great momentum (I nearly said 'inertia' ) that, realistically, they won't merge - especially in their homelands, where most practitioners know only the tradition they grew up with. (Sometimes I think Western converts forget how unusual their/our situation is.)

More broadly, religions have recently been making alliances with each other, bridging all sorts of historical divisions and animosities. HHDL has been prominent in this, as has Pope Francis. Rightly or wrongly, I see one of the reasons as a need to bring together, for mutual support and encouragement, all people whose primary motivations are not materialism and consumerism - or nationalism, come to think of it. In that context, building bridges between Theravada and Mahayana is relatively easy and has no significant downside.


Kim

[Bhikkhu Pesala]

There is only one Noble Eightfold Path, not two, or a hundred.

There are hundreds or thousands of diverse schools, sects, and nikāyas. Each tradition has its own peculiarities, stuff that never was taught by the Buddha, but invented later.

It serves no purpose to talk about bridging the gap between various views and beliefs. One has to bridge the gap between ignorance and knowledge. If you do not know what the Buddha taught then it is your duty to find out.

For example, in the Saṃkhitta Suttaṃ

“Those things, Gotamī, regarding which you know, ‘These things lead to dispassion, not to passion; to liberation, not to bondage; to relinquishment, not to accumulation; to having few wishes, not to having many wishes; to contentment, not to discontent; to seclusion, not to association; to arousing energy, not to laziness; to being easy to support, not to being hard to support,’ definitely, Gotamī, you can decide, ‘This is the Dhamma, this is the Vinaya, this is the Teacher’s instruction.’”

Again in the Anuruddha Mahāvitakka Suttaṃ

1. This Dhamma is for one who wants little, not for one who wants much (appicchassāyaṃ dhammo, nāyaṃ dhammo mahicchassa).
2. This Dhamma is for the contented, not for the discontented (santuṭṭhassāyaṃ dhammo, nāyaṃ dhammo asantuṭṭhassa).
3. This Dhamma is for the reclusive, not for one fond of society (pavivittassāyaṃ dhammo, nāyaṃ dhammo saṅgaṇikārāmassa).
4. This Dhamma is for the energetic, not for the lazy (āraddhavīriyassāyaṃ dhammo, nāyaṃ dhammo kusītassa).
5. This Dhamma is for one with well-established mindfulness, not for one of confused mindfulness (upaṭṭhitassatissāyaṃ dhammo, nāyaṃ dhammo muṭṭhassatissa).
6. This Dhamma is for the composed, not for the uncomposed (samāhitassāyaṃ dhammo, nāyaṃ dhammo asamāhitassa).
7. This Dhamma is for the wise, not for the unwise (paññavato ayaṃ dhammo, nāyaṃ dhammo duppaññassa).
8. This Dhamma is for one who is free from impediments, not for one who delights in impediments (nippapañcārāmassāyaṃ dhammo nippapañcaratino, nāyaṃ dhammo papañcārāmassa papañcaratino).

[dylanj]

...the Mahayana and Theravada are separate paths, the former being devotional in character and the latter employing mental investigation and analysis.

I am a Theravādin all the way but this is certainly not why & is certainly not true.

[DNS]

I think that on the path to the goal that both vehicles must be abandoned.
chownah

You abandon the raft on the other shore, not while you are still on the path.

The Blessed One said: "Suppose a man were traveling along a path. He would see a great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other. The thought would occur to him, 'Here is this great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other. What if I were to gather grass, twigs, branches, & leaves and, having bound them together to make a raft, were to cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft, making an effort with my hands & feet?' Then the man, having gathered grass, twigs, branches, & leaves, having bound them together to make a raft, would cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft, making an effort with his hands & feet. [7] Having crossed over to the further shore, he might think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having hoisted it on my head or carrying it on my back, go wherever I like?' What do you think, monks: Would the man, in doing that, be doing what should be done with the raft?"

"No, lord."
MN 22
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

[form]

.You abandon the raft on the other shore, not while you are still on the path.

Agree. But it will be very hard to practice if one cling on very hard to concepts and words.