Is the Pali Canon seen as legitimate / correct-view for Mahayana Buddhists?

[Heimdall]

Hello everyone!

I'm an inquirer into Mahayana Buddhism (I'm currently attending a Zen Buddhist center at my temporary location; I'll be moving back to my main residence and have to find another Buddhist Temple / Center in a couple of weeks).

I wanted to get started reading, studying, and meditating on the Sutras, and considering that I'm not set in a specific school yet (due to these circumstances - there's a Zen place and Vietnamese place that both seem welcoming, but I'll have to check them out myself when I get there - who knows) - I've decided that the best place to start off are the bodies of text common to most traditions - namely the Tripitaka - as I was under the impression that most Mahayana schools use a Sanskrit or East-Asian language version of the Pali Canon and then build off of it with additional sutras - so I bought the "Long Discourses of the Buddha" translated from the Pali Digha Nikaya by Maurice Walshe. It was on sale for half off, so I bought it for $25.

However, to my dismay, I've found out after purchasing it that what I read online was only sort of true, because while it seems that there is incredible overlap between the Pali and Sanskrit / East-Asian canons such that they seem to be based off the same texts and early doctrines of the Buddha, the Pali canon has additional sutras not in the Sanskrit / East-Asian tradition and some sutras outright substantively differing in content.

So...with that being said...are the Therevada texts still seen as legitimate / orthodox / authentic by the Mahayanan Buddhists? Are they legitimately teachings by the Buddha? Are they worth reading? Is there anything "heretical" or wrong-view in these texts that I should be worried about?

Thanks.

[Malcolm]

Hello everyone!

I'm an inquirer into Mahayana Buddhism (I'm currently attending a Zen Buddhist center at my temporary location; I'll be moving back to my main residence and have to find another Buddhist Temple / Center in a couple of weeks).

I wanted to get started reading, studying, and meditating on the Sutras, and considering that I'm not set in a specific school yet (due to these circumstances - there's a Zen place and Vietnamese place that both seem welcoming, but I'll have to check them out myself when I get there - who knows) - I've decided that the best place to start off are the bodies of text common to most traditions - namely the Tripitaka - as I was under the impression that most Mahayana schools use a Sanskrit or East-Asian language version of the Pali Canon and then build off of it with additional sutras - so I bought the "Long Discourses of the Buddha" translated from the Pali Digha Nikaya by Maurice Walshe. It was on sale for half off, so I bought it for $25.

However, to my dismay, I've found out after purchasing it that what I read online was only sort of true, because while it seems that there is incredible overlap between the Pali and Sanskrit / East-Asian canons such that they seem to be based off the same texts and early doctrines of the Buddha, the Pali canon has additional sutras not in the Sanskrit / East-Asian tradition and some sutras outright substantively differing in content.

So...with that being said...are the Therevada texts still seen as legitimate / orthodox / authentic by the Mahayanan Buddhists? Are they legitimately teachings by the Buddha? Are they worth reading? Is there anything "heretical" or wrong-view in these texts that I should be worried about?

Thanks.

Legitimate, but not to read to the exclusion of Mahayana, which is more profound and has a higher view.

[PadmaVonSamba]

They are good in the beginning,
good in the middle,
and good in the end.
All worth studying.

[Queequeg]

Hello everyone!

I'm an inquirer into Mahayana Buddhism (I'm currently attending a Zen Buddhist center at my temporary location; I'll be moving back to my main residence and have to find another Buddhist Temple / Center in a couple of weeks).

I wanted to get started reading, studying, and meditating on the Sutras, and considering that I'm not set in a specific school yet (due to these circumstances - there's a Zen place and Vietnamese place that both seem welcoming, but I'll have to check them out myself when I get there - who knows) - I've decided that the best place to start off are the bodies of text common to most traditions - namely the Tripitaka - as I was under the impression that most Mahayana schools use a Sanskrit or East-Asian language version of the Pali Canon and then build off of it with additional sutras - so I bought the "Long Discourses of the Buddha" translated from the Pali Digha Nikaya by Maurice Walshe. It was on sale for half off, so I bought it for $25.

However, to my dismay, I've found out after purchasing it that what I read online was only sort of true, because while it seems that there is incredible overlap between the Pali and Sanskrit / East-Asian canons such that they seem to be based off the same texts and early doctrines of the Buddha, the Pali canon has additional sutras not in the Sanskrit / East-Asian tradition and some sutras outright substantively differing in content.

So...with that being said...are the Therevada texts still seen as legitimate / orthodox / authentic by the Mahayanan Buddhists? Are they legitimately teachings by the Buddha? Are they worth reading? Is there anything "heretical" or wrong-view in these texts that I should be worried about?

Thanks.

There is reason to be concerned if you're aim is the Mahayana and Buddhahood. If your first in depth exposure to Buddhism is the Pali canon, you will consciously and unconsciously absorb the Hinayana views, and you will find yourself undoing many of these views and assumptions over the long haul.

I would suggest starting with Mahayana sutras first. I would suggest this course: The Heart Sutra - the crash course in Mahayana view. The Vimalakirti Sutra as an intro to the Mahayana narrative style and an expanded and entertaining presentation of Mahayana views. And then, you should become familiar with the biography of the Buddha - though based on the Pali texts, The Life of Buddha by Nanamoli, is my personal favorite, but there are others - this is critical to understand the framework shared by all traditions. And then, especially if you interested in East Asian Mahayana, the Lotus; read it as though you were reading a novel - just let the story wash over you.

And pair this with daily practice, however minimal.

But, that said, you'll likely get many recommendations. Don't trust any rando on the internet, including me.

[narhwal90]

I'd suggest reading as many of them as time and circumstances permit, engage with the schools that interest you, and make your own choices.

[Genjo Conan]

If by Pali canon you mean the Sutta Pitaka, then yes-ish. The Chinese Agamas aren't identical to the Pali Nikayas, but they're pretty close (and the NIkayas are more readily available in English translation), and are accepted as canonical in the East Asian traditions. I don't know whether these texts appear in the Tibetan canon.

The Pali Canon also includes the Abhidhamma and the Theravada Vinaya, neither of which are accepted in any Mahayana sect of which I'm aware. We have the Mahayana Abhidharma instead, and Mahayana monastics follow either the Dharmaguptaka or the Mulasarvastivada VInaya.

[Johnny Dangerous]

It's seen as foundational, but provisional, Mahayana is definitive. I love the Pali stuff and it was my first exposure to Buddhism. I still read it pretty frequently and some Suttas are among my favorite pieces of Buddhist scripture. I actually feel like you can find the seed of the Mahayana in the Pali Canon.

[PadmaVonSamba]

All texts are regarded as authentic teachings of the Buddha by those followers who regard them as such. Nobody can say with absolute certainty what the Buddha did or did not teach with regards to everything purported to be his teachings, but there is a general agreement that most of stuff that’s been passed down for more than a thousand years is legitimate.

Or at any rate, it’s where Buddhism is. So, ultimately there aren’t too many options. if monks are teaching from something that maybe the Buddha never said, well, too bad. It’s a Buddhist teaching now. One has only a few decades in this life, so “take it or leave it” right?

I would guess that there are more Mahayana Buddhists who accept the Pali teachings as genuine than there are Theravada Buddhists who regard the Mahayana teachings as genuine. There are some scholars who have suggested that most of the sutras rendered in Sanskrit (rather than in Pali) were simply made up during the reign of King Asoka.

[Queequeg]

There are some scholars who have suggested that most of the sutras rendered in Sanskrit (rather than in Pali) were simply made up during the reign of King Asoka.

You're in danger of sending people down the Original BuddhismTM rabbit hole looking for the real Buddha Gautama.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Any version of the Buddha would probably find it ironic that people are in this constant search for the "real" one.

[Heimdall]

Any version of the Buddha would probably find it ironic that people are in this constant search for the "real" one.

I've been there, done that with Christianity, only to realize its a fruitless endeavor that misses the point.

I want to join the Mahayana Tradition (either through Zen or Pure Land), and just out of respect for the tradition, I don't want to mix and match my own canon, but I do want to start with the basics.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Any version of the Buddha would probably find it ironic that people are in this constant search for the "real" one.

I've been there, done that with Christianity, only to realize its a fruitless endeavor that misses the point.

I want to join the Mahayana Tradition (either through Zen or Pure Land), and just out of respect for the tradition, I don't want to mix and match my own canon, but I do want to start with the basics.

There is a bit of a transition, but I started with Pali Stuff as a base, it was the main Buddhist literature I had a ( admittedly very basic) understanding of. I also was familiar with the Diamond Sutra, Heart Sutra, and Lankavatara, but prior to studying commentary, etc. on them I did not really "get" them at all, whereas the Pali stuff was easier for me to digest for some reason. This was also 27 years ago so way less stuff was readilyavailable.

I'd suggest starting with a sutra like the Heart or Diamond with a reliable commentary.

I don't think it's really mixing and matching, there are some Pali sutta and notions that permeate the Mahayana too - Eight Worldly Dharmas for instance is straight from a Pali Sutta. I think generally what happens if you move to a Mahayana view is that the context and way of reading Pali stuff changes, I don't see any reason you'd need to exclude it, and in fact understanding the basics of things like the Three Seals, Four Noble Truths etc. is good preparation for reading Mahayana literature. Like I said, that view is provisional but also foundational to the Mahayana.

Of course, having a flesh and blood teacher to discuss this stuff is worth it's weight in gold, and will in almost all cases be faster track than trying to muddle through on one's own.

[frankie]

Legitimate, but not to read to the exclusion of Mahayana, which is more profound and has a higher view.

A superficial and merely technical understanding would probably concur. It is interesting to note, however, how many practioners notice after 'beginning' with the Pali canon, before moving onto the 'higher view Mahayana/Vajrayana, that they eventually arrive at the fascinating 'destination of no destination' where they discover that, for example, the Four Noble Truths, are embedded within and experiently realised to be contained in the 'highest views'. It seems this is why the savviest teachers are not too keen on higher-lower discriminations.

The lower/higher dichotomies then become a source of ironic humour. informed by this, one can read again the Pali canon and the 'higher teachings and find the whole experience vibrates with instantaneous recognition and profound meaning. No differences, unless there is remaining a faulty determination to hold onto them.

[Malcolm]

Legitimate, but not to read to the exclusion of Mahayana, which is more profound and has a higher view.

A superficial and merely technical understanding would probably concur. It is interesting to note, however, how many practioners notice after 'beginning' with the Pali canon, before moving onto the 'higher view Mahayana/Vajrayana, that they eventually arrive at the fascinating 'destination of no destination' where they discover that, for example, the Four Noble Truths, are embedded within and experiently realised to be contained in the 'highest views'. It seems this is why the savviest teachers are not too keen on higher-lower discriminations.

The lower/higher dichotomies then become a source of ironic humour. informed by this, one can read again the Pali canon and the 'higher teachings and find the whole experience vibrates with instantaneous recognition and profound meaning. No differences, unless there is remaining a faulty determination to hold onto them.

Tell that to Nāgārjuna.

[frankie]

"The third (Noble) truth is the Truth of Cessation. Related to the Truth of Cessation is recognizing emptiness and the nature of one's mind. Emptiness and the nature of one's mind, which is Buddha nature or Buddha essence are not different, they are actually inseparable. What is the nature of this natural state of the mind, this buddha nature? It has complete happiness and joy; it doesn't have any suffering or illness. It's like that all the time. That is what we call resting in happiness." (MIngyur Rinpoche).

Of course there are a million quotables who will gainsay or support this. I guess it comes down to who we decide to hitch our wagon to and the experiences we have.

Only ever met Mingyur once and he seemed a lovely bloke. He is not a teacher of mine though, I only use this because it supports my understanding. Of course, others will have their own motivations and supporting evidences.

I guess it remains what it really is; all a bit of a conceptual game that should probably be treated with something of a pinch of salt and not solidified into immovable pillars that we cling to and that get in the way of realising...whatever you have been conditioned/taught to call that 'non-thing that the empty thing finds to be empty of, (.......) except that it also gives forth all...blah, blah, blah, blah.'

[Aemilius]

There is a definite difference regarding the conception of nirvana in Sravakayana and Mahayana. Mahayana texts say that it is a downfall for a Bodhisattva to wish for the attainment of sravakayana nirvana. See the Bodhisattva precepts sutra or the (Mahayana) Brahmanet sutra, or the Bodhisattva pratimoksha. You can get a feeling of what Mahayana nirvana is by reading mahayana sutras like the Lotus sutra, Avatamsaka sutra, the Perfection of Wisdom sutras etc...

[Malcolm]

"The third (Noble) truth is the Truth of Cessation. Related to the Truth of Cessation is recognizing emptiness and the nature of one's mind. Emptiness and the nature of one's mind, which is Buddha nature or Buddha essence are not different, they are actually inseparable. What is the nature of this natural state of the mind, this buddha nature? It has complete happiness and joy; it doesn't have any suffering or illness. It's like that all the time. That is what we call resting in happiness." (MIngyur Rinpoche).

Of course there are a million quotables who will gainsay or support this. I guess it comes down to who we decide to hitch our wagon to and the experiences we have.

The shravakayana texts do not describe the path of buddhahood, period. You can check with Nagarjuna on that in the Ratnavali.

[Matt J]

I think the Suttas and associated practices are quite profound and Foundational. Most Western Mahayana folks I’ve met tend to skip them to their own detriment,

[frankie]

There is a definite difference regarding the conception of nirvana in Sravakayana and Mahayana. Mahayana texts say that it is a downfall for a Bodhisattva to wish for the attainment of sravakayana nirvana. See the Bodhisattva precepts sutra or the (Mahayana) Brahmanet sutra, or the Bodhisattva pratimoksha. You can get a feeling of what Mahayana nirvana is by reading mahayana sutras like the Lotus sutra, Avatamsaka sutra, the Perfection of Wisdom sutras etc...

Yes, no question about that.

Differences are indeed the name of the samsaric 'game' in the world of duality and comparison making. I imagine it only finds its consummation and end in... (fill in your preferred received/second-hand/taught/understood/experienced, version).

[frankie]

The shravakayana texts do not describe the path of buddhahood, period. You can check with Nagarjuna on that in the Ratnavali.

Thanks Malcolm, no need. I have no reason to disbelieve you have done so. Outside of that received information, who knows, your beliefs may be another thing.

I suppose it would be intellctual fun to question a live Nagarjuna and tease nuances and possible implications out, in a back and forth. But only his historical words and the increasing commentaries on them now remain for us to parse and quibble over.

However, the implication is writ large in what the 'live' Mingyur says. My own understanding (above) and that of his (among others), will do for me for the time being. I am led to understand Mingyur's scholarship and meditative realisation is profound and sound enough for many.