What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
What do these two schools say about the physical world? Is yogacara some form of solipsism? every Buddhist who believes in Yogacara should believe that only he has consciousness, while other people and living beings around him do not have consciousness and that they are just philosophical zombies that exist only in his imagination? Is this very different from the Theravada doctrine?
- confusedlayman
- Posts: 6231
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
- Location: Human Realm (as of now)
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
yogacara never said that...Cool-team wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 3:42 pm What do these two schools say about the physical world? Is yogacara some form of solipsism? every Buddhist who believes in Yogacara should believe that only he has consciousness, while other people and living beings around him do not have consciousness and that they are just philosophical zombies that exist only in his imagination? Is this very different from the Theravada doctrine?
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
No. I appreciate that you want to ask questions about Mahayana and maybe you find the other forum a bit too aggressive, but asking these questions here really isn't a good idea. Lots of people here uncritically hate all kinds of Buddhism that are actually practiced by real people in the real world, and so will say "yes" to any and all critique regardless the merit. You will encounter these people roaming the forums shouting misinformation, untruths, likely even lies, like "Buddhaghosa was a Hindu."Cool-team wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 3:42 pm What do these two schools say about the physical world? Is yogacara some form of solipsism? every Buddhist who believes in Yogacara should believe that only he has consciousness, while other people and living beings around him do not have consciousness and that they are just philosophical zombies that exist only in his imagination? Is this very different from the Theravada doctrine?
Your claim that "every Buddhist who believes in Yogacara should believe that only he has consciousness, while other people and living beings around him do not have consciousness" is basically completely untrue. I don't know who told you it, but it is a common untruth that is ubiquitous on the Internet.
This isn't actually a subforum where it is appropriate to go into detail about what the actual differences between Theravada and Yogacara are. Yogacara is a Mahayana Abhidharmika school. In Tibet, they call the Yogacarin Abhidharma tradition "Higher Abhidharma" to differentiate it from other Abhidharma traditions. They believe in eight consciousnesses that all beings have. There are no people walking around without minds in Yogarcara, not even appearances of mindless people who seem to have minds, unless you are hallucinating. If you are hallucinating, the issue really isn't to do with Theravada vs Yogacara anymore.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
-
- Posts: 2298
- Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 7:33 pm
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
Yogacara is a mahayana school so yes it is different than theravada. Maybe you should seek a mahayana forum if you are interested in Yogacara.
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
Yogachara is believed to be subjective idealism, but how can it not be solipsism if the whole world exists only in the mind, including other people? Should other people be philosophical zombies? Or do I not understand? thankconfusedlayman wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 4:16 pmyogacara never said that...Cool-team wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 3:42 pm What do these two schools say about the physical world? Is yogacara some form of solipsism? every Buddhist who believes in Yogacara should believe that only he has consciousness, while other people and living beings around him do not have consciousness and that they are just philosophical zombies that exist only in his imagination? Is this very different from the Theravada doctrine?
Last edited by Cool-team on Thu Mar 04, 2021 8:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
Thank you! Let me ask you why you say "is basically completely untrue"? Are there any caveats?Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 5:42 pmNo. I appreciate that you want to ask questions about Mahayana and maybe you find the other forum a bit too aggressive, but asking these questions here really isn't a good idea. Lots of people here uncritically hate all kinds of Buddhism that are actually practiced by real people in the real world, and so will say "yes" to any and all critique regardless the merit. You will encounter these people roaming the forums shouting misinformation, untruths, likely even lies, like "Buddhaghosa was a Hindu."Cool-team wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 3:42 pm What do these two schools say about the physical world? Is yogacara some form of solipsism? every Buddhist who believes in Yogacara should believe that only he has consciousness, while other people and living beings around him do not have consciousness and that they are just philosophical zombies that exist only in his imagination? Is this very different from the Theravada doctrine?
Your claim that "every Buddhist who believes in Yogacara should believe that only he has consciousness, while other people and living beings around him do not have consciousness" is basically completely untrue. I don't know who told you it, but it is a common untruth that is ubiquitous on the Internet.
This isn't actually a subforum where it is appropriate to go into detail about what the actual differences between Theravada and Yogacara are. Yogacara is a Mahayana Abhidharmika school. In Tibet, they call the Yogacarin Abhidharma tradition "Higher Abhidharma" to differentiate it from other Abhidharma traditions. They believe in eight consciousnesses that all beings have. There are no people walking around without minds in Yogarcara, not even appearances of mindless people who seem to have minds, unless you are hallucinating. If you are hallucinating, the issue really isn't to do with Theravada vs Yogacara anymore.
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
Now that it's moved to "Connections..."
It is basically completely untrue in the sense of "completely untrue," but the caveat is that some Yogācārins entertain theories that the physical cosmos is not only generated through the karma of the beings within it, but also that the physical cosmos does not exist, and what we think of as "the physical cosmos" and "the external world" is actually like a movie that our mind plays to us according to our karma. It is unlike a movie in that we can interact with it, but this fundamental idea of the world being false and mostly-mind-generated is a significant point in "classical" Yogacara, if we will.
They bring up arguments like that a river can appear like clear water to a human, but like puss and foul substances to a ghost. You'll notice all this has to do with the "insentient cosmos." I have to later find the specific quote, but Venerable Vasubandhu defines the cosmos as a kind of shared karma. This is why the bad behaviour of sentient beings precipitates the end of an aeon and "the destruction of the world."
So the reason "completely untrue" needs to be caveated is because there is a reason why Venerable Dharmakīrti wrote the Saṃtānāntarasiddhināmaprakaraṇa (Proof of Others' Mindstreams). It was not clear given the underpinnings of Yogācārin thought how we could be sure that anything at all, even what appears like another sentient being, is not just a hallucination-like sense experience. Ven Dharmakīrti wrote said treatise to argue against solipsism directly. No other Buddhist tradition of schools has had to do that or felt the need to do that, meaning IMO that they didn't think solipsism was something worth seriously addressing and refuting. It was just obviously wrong, and Ven Dharmakīrti agrees.
It is basically completely untrue in the sense of "completely untrue," but the caveat is that some Yogācārins entertain theories that the physical cosmos is not only generated through the karma of the beings within it, but also that the physical cosmos does not exist, and what we think of as "the physical cosmos" and "the external world" is actually like a movie that our mind plays to us according to our karma. It is unlike a movie in that we can interact with it, but this fundamental idea of the world being false and mostly-mind-generated is a significant point in "classical" Yogacara, if we will.
They bring up arguments like that a river can appear like clear water to a human, but like puss and foul substances to a ghost. You'll notice all this has to do with the "insentient cosmos." I have to later find the specific quote, but Venerable Vasubandhu defines the cosmos as a kind of shared karma. This is why the bad behaviour of sentient beings precipitates the end of an aeon and "the destruction of the world."
So the reason "completely untrue" needs to be caveated is because there is a reason why Venerable Dharmakīrti wrote the Saṃtānāntarasiddhināmaprakaraṇa (Proof of Others' Mindstreams). It was not clear given the underpinnings of Yogācārin thought how we could be sure that anything at all, even what appears like another sentient being, is not just a hallucination-like sense experience. Ven Dharmakīrti wrote said treatise to argue against solipsism directly. No other Buddhist tradition of schools has had to do that or felt the need to do that, meaning IMO that they didn't think solipsism was something worth seriously addressing and refuting. It was just obviously wrong, and Ven Dharmakīrti agrees.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
It would make the psychic power of mind reading rather redundant
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
that is, as I understand it, there are two versions in Yogashara:Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 10:31 pm Now that it's moved to "Connections..."
It is basically completely untrue in the sense of "completely untrue," but the caveat is that some Yogācārins entertain theories that the physical cosmos is not only generated through the karma of the beings within it, but also that the physical cosmos does not exist, and what we think of as "the physical cosmos" and "the external world" is actually like a movie that our mind plays to us according to our karma. It is unlike a movie in that we can interact with it, but this fundamental idea of the world being false and mostly-mind-generated is a significant point in "classical" Yogacara, if we will.
They bring up arguments like that a river can appear like clear water to a human, but like puss and foul substances to a ghost. You'll notice all this has to do with the "insentient cosmos." I have to later find the specific quote, but Venerable Vasubandhu defines the cosmos as a kind of shared karma. This is why the bad behaviour of sentient beings precipitates the end of an aeon and "the destruction of the world."
So the reason "completely untrue" needs to be caveated is because there is a reason why Venerable Dharmakīrti wrote the Saṃtānāntarasiddhināmaprakaraṇa (Proof of Others' Mindstreams). It was not clear given the underpinnings of Yogācārin thought how we could be sure that anything at all, even what appears like another sentient being, is not just a hallucination-like sense experience. Ven Dharmakīrti wrote said treatise to argue against solipsism directly. No other Buddhist tradition of schools has had to do that or felt the need to do that, meaning IMO that they didn't think solipsism was something worth seriously addressing and refuting. It was just obviously wrong, and Ven Dharmakīrti agrees.
One version says that all people have consciousness, sensations and thoughts, and also that all people and other living beings exist independently of my imagination.
In another version All people are philosophical zombies that exist only in my imagination and I just watch an interactive movie?
Which version do they believe more?
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
You can certainly look at it that way, but it is an over-simple dichotomy with questionable utility.
No mainstream interpretation of the Buddhadharma that I am familiar with states that other people are definitely "philosophical zombies." That being said, Yogācāra is not a person, it is a nebulous set of interlocking philosophies, and what "Yogācārins" believe is actually determined by what people who call themselves Yogācārin believe themselves about said doctrines, philosophies, and ideologies. It could be well that some Yogācārins believe they are the centre of the universe and that none exist but them. Atheists could also believe such a fallacy, or theists, or Hindus for that matter. "All is Śiva, I am Śiva, I am all that is." That could be a form of solipsism.
It depends on the person and if they are predisposed to solipsistic readings of reality for whatever reasons. On terms of "Which version do they believe more," if "they" are "Yogācārins in general," then most Yogācārins believe the wisdom of Venerable Dharmakīrti that rejects solipsism. Solipsistic Yogācārins would be a statistical minority in the extreme.
No mainstream interpretation of the Buddhadharma that I am familiar with states that other people are definitely "philosophical zombies." That being said, Yogācāra is not a person, it is a nebulous set of interlocking philosophies, and what "Yogācārins" believe is actually determined by what people who call themselves Yogācārin believe themselves about said doctrines, philosophies, and ideologies. It could be well that some Yogācārins believe they are the centre of the universe and that none exist but them. Atheists could also believe such a fallacy, or theists, or Hindus for that matter. "All is Śiva, I am Śiva, I am all that is." That could be a form of solipsism.
It depends on the person and if they are predisposed to solipsistic readings of reality for whatever reasons. On terms of "Which version do they believe more," if "they" are "Yogācārins in general," then most Yogācārins believe the wisdom of Venerable Dharmakīrti that rejects solipsism. Solipsistic Yogācārins would be a statistical minority in the extreme.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
thank you.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 11:30 pm You can certainly look at it that way, but it is an over-simple dichotomy with questionable utility.
No mainstream interpretation of the Buddhadharma that I am familiar with states that other people are definitely "philosophical zombies." That being said, Yogācāra is not a person, it is a nebulous set of interlocking philosophies, and what "Yogācārins" believe is actually determined by what people who call themselves Yogācārin believe themselves about said doctrines, philosophies, and ideologies. It could be well that some Yogācārins believe they are the centre of the universe and that none exist but them. Atheists could also believe such a fallacy, or theists, or Hindus for that matter. "All is Śiva, I am Śiva, I am all that is." That could be a form of solipsism.
It depends on the person and if they are predisposed to solipsistic readings of reality for whatever reasons. On terms of "Which version do they believe more," if "they" are "Yogācārins in general," then most Yogācārins believe the wisdom of Venerable Dharmakīrti that rejects solipsism. Solipsistic Yogācārins would be a statistical minority in the extreme.
That is, the Yogacara school is not popular in Buddhism? (How many percent believe in it) What are the most popular schools in Mahayana Buddhism? How are they different from Yogacara?
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
This is too difficult to address tonight adequately. The most popular kind of Buddhism in the world today is Amidism, otherwise known as "Pure Land" Buddhism, a kind of late-stage Mahāyāna, but even this is not really the case and requires "unpacking." Hopefully I have time tomorrow.
Yogācāra is no longer a distinct sect of Buddhism. Instead, you have different contemporary sects influenced by different kinds of Yogācāra to various degrees. Zen is very influenced by Yogācāra, but not Yogācārin Abhidharma. Tibetan Buddhism is very influenced by Yogācārin Abhidharma (particularly Ven Asangha's Abhidharma treatise), but not necessarily by Venerable Paramārtha's way of teaching based on Ven Vasubandhu which is what East Asia received largely. Tiāntāi, another school that no longer exists as a formal "living tradition," polemicized against the Yogācārins and rejected their doctrines. I can add more to this later but not now.
Yogācāra is no longer a distinct sect of Buddhism. Instead, you have different contemporary sects influenced by different kinds of Yogācāra to various degrees. Zen is very influenced by Yogācāra, but not Yogācārin Abhidharma. Tibetan Buddhism is very influenced by Yogācārin Abhidharma (particularly Ven Asangha's Abhidharma treatise), but not necessarily by Venerable Paramārtha's way of teaching based on Ven Vasubandhu which is what East Asia received largely. Tiāntāi, another school that no longer exists as a formal "living tradition," polemicized against the Yogācārins and rejected their doctrines. I can add more to this later but not now.
Last edited by Coëmgenu on Fri Mar 05, 2021 12:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
Thank you very muchCoëmgenu wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 11:56 pm This is too difficult to address tonight adequately. The most popular kind of Buddhism in the world today is Amidism, otherwise known as "Pure Land" Buddhism, a kind of late-stage Mahāyāna, but even this is not really the case and requires "unpacking." Hopefully I have time tomorrow.
Yogācāra is no longer a distinct sect of Buddhism. Instead, you have different contemporary sects influenced by different kinds of Yogācāra to various degrees. Zen is very influenced by Yogācāra, but not Yogācārin Abhidharma. Tibetan Buddhism is very influenced by Yogācārin Abhidharma (particularly Ven Asangha's Abhidharma treatise), but not necessarily by Venerable Paramārtha's way of teaching based on Ven Vasubandhu which is what East Asia received largely. Tiāntāi, another school that no longer exists as a formal "living tradition," polemicized against the Yogācārins and rejected their doctrines as crypto-Sarvāstivādin. I can add more to this later but not now.
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
Really ? How so ? I thought the period of pureland teaching surfacing as in between before BC .Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 11:56 pm This is too difficult to address tonight adequately. The most popular kind of Buddhism in the world today is Amidism, otherwise known as "Pure Land" Buddhism, a kind of late-stage Mahāyāna, but even this is not really the case and requires "unpacking." Hopefully I have time tomorrow.
Yogācāra is no longer a distinct sect of Buddhism. Instead, you have different contemporary sects influenced by different kinds of Yogācāra to various degrees. Zen is very influenced by Yogācāra, but not Yogācārin Abhidharma. Tibetan Buddhism is very influenced by Yogācārin Abhidharma (particularly Ven Asangha's Abhidharma treatise), but not necessarily by Venerable Paramārtha's way of teaching based on Ven Vasubandhu which is what East Asia received largely. Tiāntāi, another school that no longer exists as a formal "living tradition," polemicized against the Yogācārins and rejected their doctrines. I can add more to this later but not now.
No bashing No gossiping
Re: What are the differences between Theravada Buddhism and Yogacara?
Hence the "unpacking." Modern Pure Land isn't necessarily the same as ancient Pure Land Buddhism. Pure Land Buddhism may well start as a rigourist movement of bodhisattvayāna, for reasons I hope to later outline when I get to this. You need to be an athlete of asceticism to enter into Akṣobhya Buddha's Eastern Paradise, for instance. I can write more later.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.