Some videos, input please

[PorkChop]

Against my better judgement, I'm reposting these...
Saw them last night and responded on youtube comments (to Brian Ruhe).
Posted a thread here last night that got unintentionally deleted.
Should've just blown these off, but given that Brian Ruhe is a professor that collects money for his teachings & sells books; while Ven Dhammavuddho is a former Mahayana monk turned Theravadan, they provide the illusion of some legitimacy and I think/thought a counterpoint should be provided.

Brian Ruhe:
http://youtu.be/GDI6VYAMzIA
http://youtu.be/oUyNi_vjJQ4
http://youtu.be/GYpipPBOSac
http://www.onmarkproductions.com/html/e ... hisms.html
In a nutshell: Mahayana is not Buddhism, it's the work of Mara, meant to kill off the true Buddhism, only the Pali canon is the true Buddhism. Lots of misinformation provided about Mahayana and Tibetan Vajrayana.

Ven Dhammavuddho:
http://youtu.be/VkhcIyrq8Hs
http://youtu.be/nKO0mM48Hj8
http://youtu.be/os8ZtNjE4zA
In a nutshell: Mahayana is not Buddhism, only the Pali canon is the true Buddhism. Pokes fun at surface-level readings of various Mahayana scriptures. At one point claims to know more about "real Buddhism" than the Thai monks he trained with.

[PorkChop]

PS - I just want to make sure I'm very clear on this point:
One of the major Buddhist influences in my day-to-day life is a Theravadan from Laos.
I read the Pali Suttas regularly.
Love listening to Bhikkhu Bodhi, Ajahn Brahm, and really appreciate the work of Thanissaro Bhikkhu.
I have an Ajahn Chah pendant that I keep on my shrine when I'm not wearing it.

This is not a "Theravada vs Mahayana" thing.
This is a "misinformation about Mahayana being spread by people who may be mistaken for having some legitimacy" type of thing.

[Ayu]

Such views are a very good sangha-splitting-system: "your Buddhism - my Buddhism"

I ignore such things as good as i can. Makes no sense for me to fight in these topics. Let them have their point of view - may they be happy.

[PorkChop]

Such views are a very good sangha-splitting-system: "your Buddhism - my Buddhism"

I ignore such things as good as i can. Makes no sense for me to fight in these topics. Let them have their point of view - may they be happy.

That's a very good mindset to have.
I would share it, but the first guy (the professor) compels any Mahayana Buddhists who happen to take his Buddhism course to renounce any and all Bodhisattva vows.
He says they are the work of Mara and some sort of trickery to get aspiring Bodhisattvas to break the 5 Precepts.
Reminds me of some 7th Day Adventists who say everything's the work of the Devil and we're all going to hell.

[Ayu]

...
Reminds me of some 7th Day Adventists who say everything's the work of the Devil and we're all going to hell.

Yes. You wrote this as a kind of joke - but i wonder if it is not serious in fact?

I had discussions for maybe about two years with a german theravadin who has these opinions. That's why i'm fed up and disappointet. This person broadly knows the palikanon - but still doesn't seem to understand anything of Buddhas words.

In the end of our discussions i wondered, if she's really a buddhist in her heart? Could be a camouflaged catholic who tries to spread "the thruth" this way? Because other Theravadins, who know the palikanon by hard are more tolerant for Mahayana. Some call Mahayana and Theravada "the northern and the southern way." This seems to be right and rational.
If she's not a catholic conciously then at least unconciously.

[Jnana]

That's a very good mindset to have.
I would share it, but the first guy (the professor) compels any Mahayana Buddhists who happen to take his Buddhism course to renounce any and all Bodhisattva vows.
He says they are the work of Mara and some sort of trickery to get aspiring Bodhisattvas to break the 5 Precepts.
Reminds me of some 7th Day Adventists who say everything's the work of the Devil and we're all going to hell.

He has a poor understanding of Buddhist history and Buddhist schools and also misrepresents the Theravāda teachings as well.

[greentara]

Ok, where did you get the Ajahn Chah pendant? I used to sometimes attend Ajahn Summedho talks and I'm sure you know that Ajahn Chah was his teacher. Did you ever read
what the 'Buddha never taught' it was a strange book but I was rather captivated by it.

[PorkChop]

Ok, where did you get the Ajahn Chah pendant? I used to sometimes attend Ajahn Summedho talks and I'm sure you know that Ajahn Chah was his teacher. Did you ever read "what the 'Buddha never taught' it was a strange book but I was rather captivated by it.

The Ajahn Chah pendant (can also be a pin) was a gift from my muay thai coach.
He said it was pretty rare.
I put it on a gold chain that I used to use for my (Catholic) cross when I was a teenager and do my best to take good care of it.

Have not read that book, I'm going to have to pick it up.
I've read a good number of Ajahn Chah's talks on www.ajahnchah.org and wish he were still around.
Remember watching the video of Ajahn Summedho relating the troubles of trying to find a quiet cave to meditate in on some island in Thailand; funny guy.

[PorkChop]

...
Reminds me of some 7th Day Adventists who say everything's the work of the Devil and we're all going to hell.

Yes. You wrote this as a kind of joke - but i wonder if it is not serious in fact?

I had discussions for maybe about two years with a german theravadin who has these opinions. That's why i'm fed up and disappointet. This person broadly knows the palikanon - but still doesn't seem to understand anything of Buddhas words.

In the end of our discussions i wondered, if she's really a buddhist in her heart? Could be a camouflaged catholic who tries to spread "the thruth" this way? Because other Theravadins, who know the palikanon by hard are more tolerant for Mahayana. Some call Mahayana and Theravada "the northern and the southern way." This seems to be right and rational.
If she's not a catholic conciously then at least unconciously.

I'm really not a fan of orthodoxy and fundamentalists.
More often than not they break the spirit of the teachings in a crazy attempt to preserve the purity of the teachings; regardless of the religion.
If they can't embody the spirit of the teachings, then what's the point?

[Ayu]

He has a poor understanding of Buddhist history and Buddhist schools and also misrepresents the Theravāda teachings as well.

Good to hear.

I'm really not a fan of orthodoxy and fundamentalists.
More often than not they break the spirit of the teachings in a crazy attempt to preserve the purity of the teachings; regardless of the religion.
...

Yes, i observe it like this.
Hopefully, this teachings cannot last, because there is no "power" inside. Truth lasts longer, i think. And time is vast.
Wrong opinions are coming and going. That's life.

[Seishin]

Recent studies suggest that there were many Buddhist schools soon after Buddha's death and possibly while he was still alive. This article http://www.tricycle.com/feature/whose-buddhism-truest on Tricycle (available for subscribers) shows recent evidence of this.

Even still though, I thought it was common knowledge that Theravadan is a branch from an earlier school and Mahayana did not emerge from Theravada but a different school.

Gassho,
Seishin.

[Jnana]

Even still though, I thought it was common knowledge that Theravadan is a branch from an earlier school and Mahayana did not emerge from Theravada but a different school.

The exact origins of the earliest Mahāyāna movements in India remains unclear, but there is evidence that there were emerging bodhisattvayāna teachings being created and/or absorbed within various schools derived from both the Mahāsāṃghika and Sthaviravāda sides. And this includes the Theravāda. Bodhisattvayāna teachings were absorbed into the Mahāvihāra Theravāda commentaries and sub-commentaries. The commentator Dhammapāla wrote at some length on the subject in his Cariyāpiṭaka Aṭṭhakathā which was also included in his sub-commentary on the Brahmajāla Sutta. Ven. Bodhi has noted that Dhammapāla, in part, relied on the Bodhisattvabhūmi for his exegesis.

And when we look at the extant historical records we see that in India and Sri Lanka there were many Theravāda monastics who accepted the Pāli Tipiṭaka and who also accepted Mahāyāna teachings. For example, the Chinese monk Xuanzang (7th century CE) met Mahāyāna Sthaviras at Bodhgayā (1000 monks in one monastery), at Kaliṅa (500 monks in 10 monasteris), at Bhārukaccha (300 monks in 10 monasteries), and at Surāṣtra (about 3000 monks in 50 monasteries). Those at Bodhgayā were living in a monastery built by an early king of Sri Lanka. He also described the Abhayagirivihāra of Sri Lanka as being a Mahāyāna Sthavira monastery.

In History of Buddhism in Ceylon, Ven. Walpola Rahula describes the Abhayagiri monastics as follows:

They were liberal in their views, and always welcomed new ideas from abroad and tried to be progressive. They studied both Theravāda and Mahāyāna and widely diffused the Tripitika.

Moreover, of the eight dhāraṇī inscriptions found at the Abhayagiri Stūpa, Gregory Schopen has identified the source of six of them as being the Sarvatathāgatādhiṣṭhānahṛdayaguhyadhātukaraṇḍadhāraṇī Sūtra, and Ven. Chandawimala has identified the source of the latter two as being the Tattvasaṃgraha Tantra.

Thus, the historical development of Buddhist ideas is quite dynamic, much moreso than is often commonly acknowledged.

[Seishin]

Excellent, thank you

[lobster]

Against my better judgement, I'm reposting these...

I followed your better judgement by not watching them . . .
Just remember how broad and big hearted the best and most realized are. What can be done for the narrow minded and their small wheels of influence?
Nothing?

[PorkChop]

The exact origins of the earliest Mahāyāna movements in India remains unclear, but there is evidence that there were emerging bodhisattvayāna teachings being created and/or absorbed within various schools derived from both the Mahāsāṃghika and Sthaviravāda sides. And this includes the Theravāda. Bodhisattvayāna teachings were absorbed into the Mahāvihāra Theravāda commentaries and sub-commentaries. The commentator Dhammapāla wrote at some length on the subject in his Cariyāpiṭaka Aṭṭhakathā which was also included in his sub-commentary on the Brahmajāla Sutta. Ven. Bodhi has noted that Dhammapāla, in part, relied on the Bodhisattvabhūmi for his exegesis.

And when we look at the extant historical records we see that in India and Sri Lanka there were many Theravāda monastics who accepted the Pāli Tipiṭaka and who also accepted Mahāyāna teachings. For example, the Chinese monk Xuanzang (7th century CE) met Mahāyāna Sthaviras at Bodhgayā (1000 monks in one monastery), at Kaliṅa (500 monks in 10 monasteris), at Bhārukaccha (300 monks in 10 monasteries), and at Surāṣtra (about 3000 monks in 50 monasteries). Those at Bodhgayā were living in a monastery built by an early king of Sri Lanka. He also described the Abhayagirivihāra of Sri Lanka as being a Mahāyāna Sthavira monastery.

In History of Buddhism in Ceylon, Ven. Walpola Rahula describes the Abhayagiri monastics as follows:

They were liberal in their views, and always welcomed new ideas from abroad and tried to be progressive. They studied both Theravāda and Mahāyāna and widely diffused the Tripitika.

Moreover, of the eight dhāraṇī inscriptions found at the Abhayagiri Stūpa, Gregory Schopen has identified the source of six of them as being the Sarvatathāgatādhiṣṭhānahṛdayaguhyadhātukaraṇḍadhāraṇī Sūtra, and Ven. Chandawimala has identified the source of the latter two as being the Tattvasaṃgraha Tantra.

Thus, the historical development of Buddhist ideas is quite dynamic, much moreso than is often commonly acknowledged.

Thanks!!!

I like Ven Walpola Rahula's books.
"What the Buddha Taught" made a huge impression on me.

[greentara]

Published in Seven countries and five languages, What the Buddha Never Taught by Tim Ward was quite a well known buddhist book in the west.

[gregkavarnos]

What a sadly misinformed dude! The worst bit is that even his understanding of his own tradition is incredibly misinformed. For example: he accuses the Vajrayana tradition of being syncretic and Hinduist yet overlooks that fact that in Thai Buddhism (he claims to follow the Thai forest tradition) there is an incredible amount of syncretism with Hindu traditions (especially the Ramayana) and local shamanic practices (talisman, protective tattos, yantras). But like any good sectarian he just overlooks the aberrations of his own tradition and merely focuses on the errors of the "others".

Okay, the lecture is obviously aimed at starry-eyed ignorant neophytes, but to then make such misinformed nonsense publicly available and brag that his poorly informed lectures have 600 hits on youtube? Sad!

[PorkChop]

What a sadly misinformed dude! The worst bit is that even his understanding of his own tradition is incredibly misinformed. For example: he accuses the Vajrayana tradition of being syncretic and Hinduist yet overlooks that fact that in Thai Buddhism (he claims to follow the Thai forest tradition) there is an incredible amount of syncretism with Hindu traditions (especially the Ramayana) and local shamanic practices (talisman, protective tattos, yantras). But like any good sectarian he just overlooks the aberrations of his own tradition and merely focuses on the errors of the "others".

Okay, the lecture is obviously aimed at starry-eyed ignorant neophytes, but to then make such misinformed nonsense publicly available and brag that his poorly informed lectures have 600 hits on youtube? Sad!

Exactly!
My coach ordains yearly (last time was earlier this year). We talk Dhamma/Dharma all the time. He plays Thai monk chanting during a lot of our workouts and will spend a lot of time meditating on holy days (according to lunar calendar). At the same time, he has protection tattoos, has arranged for students to get protection tattoos, hands out protection bracelets (with sutta on them) to serious students, arranges for us to receive protection amulets from monks, and gives us chants to say daily - honoring the attributes of the Buddha (for those interested).

As you know in muay thai, the ram muay/wai kru depicts stories from the Ramayana. My coach has a picture of the demon who stole Rama's wife on his computer desktop to remind him that deluded beings are out there who try to harm innocents.

He has no problems with Mahayana practitioners. He thoroughly respects Chinese Buddhists and their approach to martial arts. He quotes a Thai Theravadan monk with a similar mindset to martial art training: "I protect myself so I can spread the Dhamma/Dharma, I protect innocents that they may be able to do good in their lives, I use the martial arts as a vehicle to spread Dharma/Dhamma, and to teach proper ethics on how we should treat each other". He's had me make copies for fliers that are from Vietnamese Mahayana monks that teach all aspects of Buddhism - Theravadan, Mahayanan, and Vajrayanan concepts are all represented.

As I said in another post, Buddha gives directions on navigating the path. Due to cultural backgrounds, certain formless entities will be favored. If anything, I think Vajrayana attempts to give some of those Hindu formless entities a Buddhist spin; but again, Vajrayana practitioners only go to refuge to enlightened beings.

The ultimate goal of course is liberation, but it is not a short path, the Dharma. Therefore, there are many instructions on how to navigate the myriad of kalpas until we can achieve liberation. Part of this is living in society, part of this is making peace with local formless beings. In reference to that Tricycle article posted earlier, it's hard to say what was "original canon"; especially given that particular Suttas are/were affected by Theravadan Abidhamma. Different teachings are going to apply more to different cultures. When one can renounce, then go for it. Until then, the Dharma/Dhamma; be it the Nikayas or the Mahayana sutras, offer many skillful means & lessons in order to navigate one's life in the right direction. Claiming one school to be the work of Mara because it does not advocate immediate renunciation and liberation is a poor example of Right Speech, imho.