Hanzze wrote:Just what I had observed by my self there is a kind of dependency to leave a subtitle practice and a lost in argumentation. My belly just tells also that compassion grows to something that could be seen as wisdom but I am not sure if there really is wisdom left.
It is in any case not useful to generalize it, but I would kindly request some profound interpretations and explanations about that possible problem.
In no word there should be seen a good or bad, right or wrong. Just with the amount of distructing that is needed.
With loving kindness
Hanzze wrote:Dear friends,
I can remember that I read some points of Mahayana Teachers that it is very dangerous for practitioner of the great vehicle to change there praxis to the teachings of the school of the elders.
Hanzze wrote:Dear Friends,
I just read it that it is "dangerous" and wanted to ask about the deeper reason. Some also told me it is not good to mix it. Personally I see no different but from personal experiences one needs to be careful to do not lose the "right" motivation for praxis, maybe just a different it times when one steps in.
Hanzze wrote:Dear TMingyur,
so let me use "Pali Canon" as resource for practice and knowledge. A dangerous trap? And why?
And as to vinaya ... Mahayana monastics have their Mūlasarvāstivāda vinaya.
tobes wrote:I don't see the premature attainment of arhatship as a particularly dangerous threat here.......
pueraeternus wrote:What I understand is that for the Mahayana practitioner, there is the danger that if he delves too deeply into the supramundane paths of the Sravakayana, he will attain the arya stages too early and slip into the Arhat stream, thus ending his Bodhisattva path prematurely.
TMingyur wrote:tobes wrote:I don't see the premature attainment of arhatship as a particularly dangerous threat here.......
That is relative. arhatship excludes the attainment of Buddhahood which is the goal of the Bodhisattva since he knows that he can be of benefit for others only as a Buddha.
Based on bodhicitta the corresponding attainment of the bodhisattva would be the 8th bhumi but not arhatship.
That is why bodhicitta is of extraordinary significance and should be practiced even in the context of the practice based on the suttas of the pali canon if this "sutta based practice" is to be legitimately called "practice of a bodhisattva". Othewise it would be the practice of a sravaka aiming at arhatship.
tobes wrote:But how do you know which path to follow and what intentions to cultivate without inquiring into and listening to many teachings?
tobes wrote:The thought that someone will be spiritually harmed by encountering the Theravada is scandalous and should be immediately repudiated.
Thus it is that those bodhisattvas,
When striving for the realization of bodhi.
Should not rest in their practice of vigor,
For they have shouldered such a heavy burden.
Until one develops the great compassion and the patiences,
Even though he may have gained irreversibility,
The Bodhisattva is still subject to a form of "dying"
Occuring through the arising of negligence.
The grounds of the Sravakas or the Pratyekabuddhas,
If entered, constitute "death" for him
Because he would thereby sever the roots
Of the Bodhisattva's understanding and awareness.
At the prospect of failling into the hell-realms.
The bodhisattva would not be struck with fright.
The grounds of the Sravakas and the Pratyekabuddhas
Do provoke great terror in him.
It is not the case that falling into the hell realms
Would create an ultimate obstacle to bodhi.
If one fell onto the grounds of the Sravakas or Pratyekabuddhs,
That would create an ultimate obstacle.
Just as is said of one who loves long life
That he is frightened at the prospect of being beheaded,
So too the grounds of the Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas
Should provoke in one this very sort of fear.
Yes, my point is that attaining arhatship or the first bhumi are likely to be fairly remote possibilities at this point.....where gaining good overall knowledge of the dharma in all its traditions should be encouraged not discouraged.
I suppose your point is that intentions even in the early stages of the path matter; and sure, they do. But how do you know which path to follow and what intentions to cultivate without inquiring into and listening to many teachings?
The thought that someone will be spiritually harmed by encountering the Theravada is scandalous and should be immediately repudiated.
TMingyur wrote:tobes wrote:
As mentioned earlier Theravada is very ambiguous: It has a bodhisattva path and the Theravada ideal is practice for the benefit of oneself and others. However the environment of the Theravada sangha is not necessarily conducive for a bodhisattva.
The decisive point as to the Theravada ideal of "practice for the benefit of oneself and others" is whether the corresponding insight is ensued or it remains mere lip service.
tobes wrote:I'm not sure about this: if a bodhisattva has the upaya to practice as a layperson, if they can descend to the hells in order to liberate sentient beings, do you really think they will find great difficulties in a community of Buddhists who uphold the Vinaya? I daresay there are far more challenging environments. And probably, scarcely more conducive environments.
This has nothing to do with vinaya but with people a bodhisattva who has not yet attained the state of "never falling back" should not associate. A bodhisattva does not associate with Hinayanists and although the Theravada does not teach Hinayana the Hinayanists are a signifcant fraction there and dare to openly raise their voices and critizise the bodhisattva path.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], smcj and 24 guests