uslic001 wrote:Whose Buddhism is Truest?
No one’s—and everyone’s, it turns out.
Long-lost scrolls shed some surprising light.
http://www.tricycle.com/feature/whose-b ... t?page=0,0
Astus wrote:The Chinese Canon - in fact, several canons edited in China - contains thousands of texts, including multiple translations of the same work, but they did not start any movement saying that "nobody and everybody is correct". Since Buddhism never had a uniform and single Holy Scripture, the diversity of texts has been always present. At the end of the day, it is naturally MY (teacher's) BUDDHISM is the truest.
Beatzen wrote:Does it strike anyone else as odd that this is such a concern here in the west?
Jikan wrote:Beatzen wrote:Does it strike anyone else as odd that this is such a concern here in the west?
It's the anxious, neurotic concern of someone who is out shopping for the best newest and brightest Dharma widget, and fears serious buyer's remorse. It's the logic of consumerism projected onto the spiritual scene IMO.
Huifeng wrote:In fact in many ways, this article just further shows that the Mahayana in its various forms and later spin offs, is even more divergent from the common threads that existed in the mainstream traditions prior.
Jnana wrote:Huifeng wrote:After going through this in depth elsewhere, do you want us to go through it all again?
I'd sooner submit to a bit of corporal self-mortification....
Will wrote:Will one of you superior "winkers" deign to (not repeat, that would be tooo much) but give us a link to your previous "going over" of the article?
Sorry Will, it was just a bit of personal between myself and Jnana, didn't mean to sound snooty.
We talked about it at length at Dhamma Wheel on this thread here, about half way down the page the article in question is mentioned and linked.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests