lowlydog wrote:Hi tomamundsen,
By attaining Nibbana, do you mean the complete irradication of ones ignorance?
Does your use of the word liberation have another meaning?
I appreciate all the information you provided, I would like to start this investigation from the finish line and work backwards. Just to be safe Nibbana and Nirvana are interchangable right?
Konchog1 wrote:Mahayana has Bodhicitta. Theravada does not. Vajrayana is a more mystical add on to Mahayana.
lowlydog wrote:Thanks for the info, lots to digest. A little confused on the interchangability of nibbana and nirvana, why are they not interchangeable other than the language difference?
Where do you get this "information" (for want of a better word) from? There is a HUGE mahayana canon. Theravadra has a long and distinguished history of "using logic and life to teach what the Buddha taught". Theravadra also has meditations to generate and develop compassion (Brahma vihara meditations, for example).zAnt wrote:From what I have learned recently, just that Theravada is much more scripture based, following more of what Buddha taught I. It's original context. Mahayana is where they take a step forward, using logic and life to teach what the Buddha taught, with more of a focus on the compassionate side and helping nature of men.
It would be clearer to say that Mahayana developed from within Theravadra. And that its later develop was more influenced by the east Asian traditions it encountered as it journeyed towards the east.Saying that Mahayana is more of an expansion pack to Theravada and that it is a short cut.
Neither tradition has an emphasis on missionary work. Mahayana differs in that it tends to place importance on the enlightenment of others (freedom from suffering) above ones own liberation. Not that one does not strive for one's liberation in the Mahayana, just that there are more options in terms of: liberating oneself first and then leading others, guiding others towards liberation and then liberating oneself, reaching liberation together with others.Theravada is more focused towards ones self of enlightenment and Mahayana is where it's your responsibility to teach others of the Buddha.
Konchog1 wrote:Mahayana has Bodhicitta. Theravada does not.
lowlydog wrote:What is the fundamental difference between Mahayana, Vajrayana, and Theravaden buddhism?
tomamundsen wrote:lowlydog wrote:Thanks for the info, lots to digest. A little confused on the interchangability of nibbana and nirvana, why are they not interchangeable other than the language difference?
Well, it's more of the connotation of the word. There is the idea of abiding nirvana vs. non-abiding nirvana. Theravada results in an abiding nirvana. Mahayana sees Samsara and Nirvana as both arising from the mind and thus different sides of the same coin. So, Bodhisattvas and Buddhas can attain a non-abiding nirvana where they can help beings in Samsara while still being liberated from suffering themselves.
zAnt wrote:You guys.
zAnt wrote:gregkavarnos wrote:Where do you get this "information" (for want of a better word) from?
You guys. I've asked many questions and read many answers. From both Dhammawheel.com and Dharmawheel.net
Either way, Mahayana gets this bad rap for being all "magical"; when in reality supernatural occurrences are common to all traditions - that was my point in the other thread.This is talking about deep wisdom beyond all conventions. How could we teach without them? We have to have names for things, isn’t that so?.