Mahayana vs Theravada

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Malcolm »

tobes wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:18 am
Konchog Thogme Jampa wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 2:40 pm The Thai Forest Tradition is the path of personal liberation to get somewhere with it it’s recommended to do full time practice. To remove all the kleshas from the mind is the goal. This requires intensive effort as you’re on your own.

I’m sure Ajahn Brahm teaching to relax is to help uptight westerners and he is well known to have skill with Jhanas which would help a lot.
No, it is the quintessence of the technique. The effort one makes is non-effort. Sound familiar?

Yes, he teaches that to westerners and easterners. But you're making the implicit and unjustified inference here is that this is somehow contrary to the tradition itself. Sorry, but it ain't.
You do realize you are responding to someone who ordained in that tradition and has personal experience of it?
User avatar
Konchog Thogme Jampa
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:48 am
Location: Saha World/Hard to Take

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Konchog Thogme Jampa »

tobes wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:18 am
Konchog Thogme Jampa wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 2:40 pm The Thai Forest Tradition is the path of personal liberation to get somewhere with it it’s recommended to do full time practice. To remove all the kleshas from the mind is the goal. This requires intensive effort as you’re on your own.

I’m sure Ajahn Brahm teaching to relax is to help uptight westerners and he is well known to have skill with Jhanas which would help a lot.
No, it is the quintessence of the technique. The effort one makes is non-effort. Sound familiar?

Yes, he teaches that to westerners and easterners. But you're making the implicit and unjustified inference here is that this is somehow contrary to the tradition itself. Sorry, but it ain't.


I don’t think the TFT is a path of non-effort even Anapanasati requires effort, but you want and are instructed to take a relaxed approach that’s fine when I practiced it was constant effort to sit in samadhi then walking meditation/long hikes because I had to create a lot of energy/momentum with the practice to be effective to bring about the insights. This was a layman not when I was a Monk.

So it doesn’t sound familiar.

Ajahn Brahm was at my novice ordination in 1999 he helped me put my robes on for the first time. Didn’t give us the teaching on “Relax” though.

All the best with your practice.
Kai lord
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun May 15, 2022 2:38 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Kai lord »

nyonchung wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 2:44 pm
Kai lord wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 2:04 pm
Malcolm wrote: Thu Jun 23, 2022 5:17 pm We don't know. We know for sure he was a contemporary of Trisrong Detsen. We know for sure that some of his associates are associated also with Padmasambhava. One can guess that those two ran in the same circles. We can be fairly confident that Vimalamitra was also his student, who arrived in Tibet around 800.

For example, there are three completely different accounts of the origin of Garab Dorje, with the sems sde and klong sde accounts being the closest, but also distinct.
So by historical estimation, Sri Sangha probably lived between the late 7th century to late 8th century?

Since its well known that Mañjuśrīmitra wrote commentaries on Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti , I went back to dig out my old and dusted copy of Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti to check out the scholarly estimation for its dating. Its presumed that since the two first volumes of the Kriya tantra, manjushri-mula-kalpa along with some of the early Tathāgatagarbha sūtras must predate Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti, so its very likely to have been in circulation during the late sixth to seventh century. this matches Mañjuśrīmitra timeline very well with Sri Sangha. And Mañjuśrīmitra might even be a contemporary of Dharmakirti at Nalanda.

So lets say if Mahayoga was in oral circulation (Not written down) during the sixth century and Garab dorje was to have a normal human lifespan and meet his Mahayoga guru, Kukuraja. Is it reasonable to estimate Garab Dorje's timeline to sixth century and perhaps mid seventh century where he would have met Mañjuśrīmitra ?
as Malcolm pointed out, the original form is a Tibetan one = dpal gyi seng ge - reconstructed as śrīsiṁha
the datation of earlier Tantric masters is a risky business, be they of nyingma or sarma translation periods
Why risky? I doubt vajrayana practitioners will lose any of their faith just because of what some historians wrote on their articles or books. The most they will give the latter some nasty reviews and ratings on Amazon or some dislikes on their youtube channel, :rolling:
Trisong De'utsen dates are possibly (742-797?)
Yes according to Tang records, but some Nyingma websites suggest Trisong was alive until 850. :stirthepot:
As Malcolm also pointed out also, lineages stories may vary, often written much later, and we should never forget this: in the origin not with an historiographical goal, and at times with a complete disregard for such an historicist approach - but reworked as such much later
Thats why its more accurate to date them using their commentaries and popular tantras/sutras dating or their contemporaries along with any major events (if any). Then try to cross references with any reliable Buddhist or Hindu historians who were alive at that time.
Through the centuries, names may have dropped from the original (often quite dry) list, mis-spelled (quite common), conflated, or assimiliated to comparable names (by contamination with a comparable list)
That is the biggest issue I faced when previously tried to identify Virupa. Some names are really popular among Buddhist masters, plus they are all renowed scholars and masters and they all either stayed or studied near the same place (Nalanda, Oddiyana, etc)
Life is like a game, either you win or lose!
Life is like a fight, either you live or die!
Life is like a show, either you laugh or cry!
Life is like a dream, either you know or not!!!
User avatar
Konchog Thogme Jampa
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:48 am
Location: Saha World/Hard to Take

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Konchog Thogme Jampa »

Malcolm wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:46 am
tobes wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:18 am
Konchog Thogme Jampa wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 2:40 pm The Thai Forest Tradition is the path of personal liberation to get somewhere with it it’s recommended to do full time practice. To remove all the kleshas from the mind is the goal. This requires intensive effort as you’re on your own.

I’m sure Ajahn Brahm teaching to relax is to help uptight westerners and he is well known to have skill with Jhanas which would help a lot.
No, it is the quintessence of the technique. The effort one makes is non-effort. Sound familiar?

Yes, he teaches that to westerners and easterners. But you're making the implicit and unjustified inference here is that this is somehow contrary to the tradition itself. Sorry, but it ain't.
You do realize you are responding to someone who ordained in that tradition and has personal experience of it?
Thanks Malcolm :thanks:
User avatar
nyonchung
Posts: 256
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2021 9:33 pm
Location: France

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by nyonchung »

Kai lord wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:59 pm a
That is the biggest issue I faced when previously tried to identify Virupa. Some names are really popular among Buddhist masters, plus they are all renowed scholars and masters and they all either stayed or studied near the same place (Nalanda, Oddiyana, etc)
"Why risky? I doubt vajrayana practitioners", risky for scholars, Western and Tibetan, if they want to establish precise datations

"Yes according to Tang records, but some Nyingma websites suggest Trisong was alive until 850", Tang Annals know nothing?, contemporary websites do?
You have to remember that some Nyingmas actually consider that this is even circa 910 (with a missing rab byung or 60 years cycle, a cycle that was anyway not existing then ... this is the way Düjom Rinpoché recounts in his "History of Buddhism"

"any reliable Buddhist or Hindu historians who were alive at that time" unfortunately, you'll have hard to find them, the earliest really "historical" work you have in India is the Rājataraṃginī (around 1148/9), the 2 vol. translation by Sir Aurel Stein is available on Internet Archive
The reliability of dates is quite limited ...
Otherwise you have the Purāṇas, but some are pretty late and rarely qualify as "history", dynastic lines are often contradicted by epigraphy (when available)

The Dunhuang documents preserve part of the Tibetan Imperial Annals , dates may vary with the Tang Annals - they usually note dates of death of a Tsenpo the year they received the news)
This a very specialized area of Tibestan studies (and recent work tend to place a good number of documents late than previously thought)
Samten Karmay studied the first preserved "chos byung" - interestingly of Phurpa

Tibetan historical tradition starts later - about mid XIIth story too - but after a formidable break in the written tradition
There was an earliest history by Khutön (XIth cent.) now only by fragments, seemingly based (at least partly) on Imperial-era documents
Dan Martin (and other) did a considerable works on these early Tibetan histories (and he very kindly made his archives available)
He was supposed to publish the translation of a major Bön history (XIVth cent?), but they had to revise the draft - and we'll have probably to wait for another two years.

"That is the biggest issue I faced when previously tried to identify Virupa."
What do you mean by "identify"? orthography may vary, but there are very few sources outside the Sakyapa sources (Sakyapas played a major role in the development of biographical and histporiographical tradition of Tibet)

There is a "later" Virupa, sometimes conflated, and Virupa is a relatively simple case, try the Indrabhutis and Dorjedenpas, not to mention the Kalachakrapadas
All starts with bare name lists, slowly amplified, as Henk Blezer showed for the Zhang zhung bsnyan brgyud - his description of the process is quite interesting and can be applied to the Buddhist mahasiddhas ... slowly, "biographical" details added to a name + a special instruction
"Me and the sky don't hold views - Me and the river have no fixed practice
Me and the madman don't have a guide- Me and the rainbow have no experiences
Me, the sun and the moon have no certitudes - Me and the jewel bear no fruit" - Dampa Sanggyé as quoted by Domar Mingyur Dorjé (born 1675)
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Removed some off-topic posts, but I am wondering whether the thread has already run it's course or not given the direction of the conversation.

Anyway, maybe it's just the order in which I was exposed but I've always felt that the Sravaka teachings held the seed of the Mahayana, and that some people just chose to water that seed and some didn't. To me it is detectable in listening to people, particularly how they frame their responsibility as regards practice, life situations with others, etc. whether they call their view Bodhicitta formerly or not. On the other hand, I've also met some Tantrika who struck me as sravaka-like in their prioritizing of certain vows and approaches, again whether it was explicitly stated or not, they went in a certain direction.

Declared adherence to certain tenets is one side of things, but sometimes there is a discrepancy between what tenets people claim to hold dear, and what they actually seem to do in practice, and what directions their minds appear to move in. So, I go by those observational things in addition to what tenets people claim to follow.

It's not because view isn't important to me, it's precisely because simply "believing" something is not the same as View in Buddhist terms, people can ascribe to all kinds of tenets formerly and have it mean very little.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Please post the insect wing/levitation/whatever stuff in Open Dharma, it does not belong here
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Malcolm »

Kai lord wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:59 pm That is the biggest issue I faced when previously tried to identify Virupa.
There are two main ones: Lamdre Virupa, and Brahmze Virupa. They are frequently confused. The latter was the disciple of Lakṣminkara, the sister of Indrabhuti III.
Kai lord
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sun May 15, 2022 2:38 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Kai lord »

Aahhh my eyes..
nyonchung wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 5:38 pm Tang Annals know nothing?, contemporary websites do?
Naturally Tang records are more trustworthy given how Chinese emperors like to keep tight records of their foreign opponents and rivals. They would be the first to notice when Trisong departed from this world and tried to take advantage of the power vacuum.
unfortunately, you'll have hard to find them, the earliest really "historical" work you have in India is the Rājataraṃginī (around 1148/9), the 2 vol. translation by Sir Aurel Stein is available on Internet Archive
The reliability of dates is quite limited ...
Things are not that bad.

Fortunately, we got Chinese monks like Yijing and Xuanzang who traveled to India, lived in Nalanda and knew Sanskrit during the Gupta era. Granted they were not trained historians and their written works had given us a good idea of what went on in India during the 6th, 7th and 8th century.
Foreign monks of great reputation like Vajrabodhi and Amoghavajra who traveled to China for missionary purposes, had Chinese disciples who recorded their actions. That greatly helped us to picture how Yoga tantras were spread to East Asia and to Southeast Asia and when tantric practices were really getting popular in India

Finally we also had prominent Vedics scholars or masters who liked to criticize Buddhist tenets by cite certain Buddhist scholars like Vasubandhu, dharmakirti, etc. Who they cite or don't cite, give us a rough picture of who existed and when. To make things even better, sometimes Buddhist masters also hit back by citing those vedic scholars. So we know who were contemporary of whom.
What do you mean by "identify"? orthography may vary, but there are very few sources outside the Sakyapa sources (Sakyapas played a major role in the development of biographical and histporiographical tradition of Tibet)There is a "later" Virupa, sometimes conflated, and Virupa is a relatively simple case, try the Indrabhutis and Dorjedenpas, not to mention the Kalachakrapadas
Before He called himself Virupa, he had a very famous but commonly used name called Dharmapala. So I was trying to identity which dharmapala was the tantric master whom was as famous as Asoka. It does not help when some records even named Dharmakirti as Dharmapala. :rolling:

So In terms of difficulty when it comes to dating individuals, tantric Dharmapala/virupa is right on par with the tantric Nagajuna.

Bet most already gave on Indrabhuti, are there four or five of him?
All starts with bare name lists, slowly amplified, as Henk Blezer showed for the Zhang zhung bsnyan brgyud - his description of the process is quite interesting and can be applied to the Buddhist mahasiddhas ... slowly, "biographical" details added to a name + a special instruction
What I found interesting is that some Buddhist mahasiddhas are actually the same mahasiddhas that certain vedic tradition worships or respect.
Malcolm wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 10:05 pm
Kai lord wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:59 pm That is the biggest issue I faced when previously tried to identify Virupa.
There are two main ones: Lamdre Virupa, and Brahmze Virupa. They are frequently confused. The latter was the disciple of Lakṣminkara, the sister of Indrabhuti III.
I don't even know Lawapa (Indrabhuti III or IV) got a sister. LOL Thats very interesting.

Is the latter virupa the same guy who suddenly came back centuries later to subdue the angry elephant?
Life is like a game, either you win or lose!
Life is like a fight, either you live or die!
Life is like a show, either you laugh or cry!
Life is like a dream, either you know or not!!!
User avatar
nyonchung
Posts: 256
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2021 9:33 pm
Location: France

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by nyonchung »

Thanks for the long answer

"Things are not that bad." well we have data, but no structured indian historiography, fortunately as your rightly point out, we have the Chinese travellers to bring in relatively safe chronological elements
the dates of translation of Indian material in Chinese are also remarkably useful (many Indian or Central Asian translators have biographies), the history of what became Shingon in Japan (Vajrabodhi and Amoghavajra you mentioned) gives us extremely useful elements (notably about the later 'tantric' Nagarjuna - the Shingon one fits well with the "eight Vidyadharas")

I studied the transmissions of the nyingma kama, the kadampas, dagpo-kagyüpas, the shangpa-kagyüpas , the sakyapas (from where the gelugpas derive) anf the different Kalachakra system, quite confusing; centuries after, authors tried to buld coherents systems (but they differ from the earlier sources where, in fact nobody actually went to Shambhala)

Sakyapas have a relatively structured system around the lamdré transmission, but aggregated a fantastic number of transmissions of various traditions, huge data, but no chronological date
the only reference we occasionaly have is to the Pala kings, their dates are often problematic

There are hindu lists of mahasiddha, they partly recoup the Tibetan lists seem relatevely late, and some major mahasiddhas (Goraksha for instance) appear in both charya systems , and are generally connected to the same places, and are still worshipped or have lineages

There is a modern Tibetan compilation of all the available lits, their iconography etc...

a later virūpa / kāla-virūpa / bi ru pa nag po / nag po bi ru pa- also one of the many a wa dhu ti pa / avadhūtipa appears in the shangpa-kagyü tradition as a disciple of Virupa himself
and different of bi ru pa / bi ru pa phyi ma / dur khrod pa / ka ma ru pa / e te pa / rgya 'gres pa / bhi rgya pa a master of Dampa Sanggyé (+d. 1117?) and of Marpa Lotsawa (1012-1097) for all the bnames seems to be (possibly) the same person
Extremely difficult to sort out when texts of the same tradition can contradict themselves ...
We just have to keep all this abeing ancient records by people who were not considering 'history" or "biography" as matters of concern, anyway, the instructions (ma ngag) being the real treasury, whoever pronounced them
"Me and the sky don't hold views - Me and the river have no fixed practice
Me and the madman don't have a guide- Me and the rainbow have no experiences
Me, the sun and the moon have no certitudes - Me and the jewel bear no fruit" - Dampa Sanggyé as quoted by Domar Mingyur Dorjé (born 1675)
User avatar
tobes
Posts: 2194
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by tobes »

Konchog Thogme Jampa wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:18 pm
tobes wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:18 am
Konchog Thogme Jampa wrote: Fri Jun 24, 2022 2:40 pm The Thai Forest Tradition is the path of personal liberation to get somewhere with it it’s recommended to do full time practice. To remove all the kleshas from the mind is the goal. This requires intensive effort as you’re on your own.

I’m sure Ajahn Brahm teaching to relax is to help uptight westerners and he is well known to have skill with Jhanas which would help a lot.
No, it is the quintessence of the technique. The effort one makes is non-effort. Sound familiar?

Yes, he teaches that to westerners and easterners. But you're making the implicit and unjustified inference here is that this is somehow contrary to the tradition itself. Sorry, but it ain't.


I don’t think the TFT is a path of non-effort even Anapanasati requires effort, but you want and are instructed to take a relaxed approach that’s fine when I practiced it was constant effort to sit in samadhi then walking meditation/long hikes because I had to create a lot of energy/momentum with the practice to be effective to bring about the insights. This was a layman not when I was a Monk.

So it doesn’t sound familiar.

Ajahn Brahm was at my novice ordination in 1999 he helped me put my robes on for the first time. Didn’t give us the teaching on “Relax” though.

All the best with your practice.
I was talking to a Sri Lankan monk the other day who went to Thailand to do retreat up north with the TFT, and he said a similar a thing - it was a bit too demanding, and he felt, contrary to being able to actually cultivate the four satipatthanas.

Nonetheless, I have heard this instruction from Ajahm Brahm in different forms, numerous times - it's hard to not to take it as the real pith. It is perhaps, as you suggested before, a less structured approach to entering the jhanas. I think there is a definite resonance with Dozgchen/Mahamudra approaches, but this does not imply they are the same.

All the best with your practice as well.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Malcolm »

tobes wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 7:20 am
Nonetheless, I have heard this instruction from Ajahm Brahm in different forms, numerous times - it's hard to not to take it as the real pith. It is perhaps, as you suggested before, a less structured approach to entering the jhanas. I think there is a definite resonance with Dozgchen/Mahamudra approaches, but this does not imply they are the same.

All the best with your practice as well.
Dzogchen teachings regard cultivating the dhyanas to be deviations.
User avatar
Konchog Thogme Jampa
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:48 am
Location: Saha World/Hard to Take

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Konchog Thogme Jampa »

tobes wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 7:20 am
Konchog Thogme Jampa wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:18 pm
tobes wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:18 am

No, it is the quintessence of the technique. The effort one makes is non-effort. Sound familiar?

Yes, he teaches that to westerners and easterners. But you're making the implicit and unjustified inference here is that this is somehow contrary to the tradition itself. Sorry, but it ain't.


I don’t think the TFT is a path of non-effort even Anapanasati requires effort, but you want and are instructed to take a relaxed approach that’s fine when I practiced it was constant effort to sit in samadhi then walking meditation/long hikes because I had to create a lot of energy/momentum with the practice to be effective to bring about the insights. This was a layman not when I was a Monk.

So it doesn’t sound familiar.

Ajahn Brahm was at my novice ordination in 1999 he helped me put my robes on for the first time. Didn’t give us the teaching on “Relax” though.

All the best with your practice.
I was talking to a Sri Lankan monk the other day who went to Thailand to do retreat up north with the TFT, and he said a similar a thing - it was a bit too demanding, and he felt, contrary to being able to actually cultivate the four satipatthanas.

Nonetheless, I have heard this instruction from Ajahm Brahm in different forms, numerous times - it's hard to not to take it as the real pith. It is perhaps, as you suggested before, a less structured approach to entering the jhanas. I think there is a definite resonance with Dozgchen/Mahamudra approaches, but this does not imply they are the same.

All the best with your practice as well.
Not saying the TFT is devoid of relaxation sitting in Samadhi is very relaxing some of those Thai Forest Wats are pretty idyllic and nice places to go. I really enjoyed practicing it as a laymen in 2008/09.

I’m sure Ajahn Brahm’s teaching is very good to follow. Where I trained however it was complete opposite we had to always put forth effort. I think you get varying degrees of approach depending on the teachers take of the TFT so my perceptions are coloured a certain way.

Anyway life’s better and a lot more can be accomplished with a relaxed mind I reckon based on all my practice experience :twothumbsup:
User avatar
tobes
Posts: 2194
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by tobes »

Malcolm wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 12:03 pm
tobes wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 7:20 am
Nonetheless, I have heard this instruction from Ajahm Brahm in different forms, numerous times - it's hard to not to take it as the real pith. It is perhaps, as you suggested before, a less structured approach to entering the jhanas. I think there is a definite resonance with Dozgchen/Mahamudra approaches, but this does not imply they are the same.

All the best with your practice as well.
Dzogchen teachings regard cultivating the dhyanas to be deviations.
I know, that's why I am saying there is a resonance in technique, not that they are the same.
User avatar
tobes
Posts: 2194
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by tobes »

Konchog Thogme Jampa wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 3:24 pm
tobes wrote: Sun Jun 26, 2022 7:20 am
Konchog Thogme Jampa wrote: Sat Jun 25, 2022 2:18 pm


I don’t think the TFT is a path of non-effort even Anapanasati requires effort, but you want and are instructed to take a relaxed approach that’s fine when I practiced it was constant effort to sit in samadhi then walking meditation/long hikes because I had to create a lot of energy/momentum with the practice to be effective to bring about the insights. This was a layman not when I was a Monk.

So it doesn’t sound familiar.

Ajahn Brahm was at my novice ordination in 1999 he helped me put my robes on for the first time. Didn’t give us the teaching on “Relax” though.

All the best with your practice.
I was talking to a Sri Lankan monk the other day who went to Thailand to do retreat up north with the TFT, and he said a similar a thing - it was a bit too demanding, and he felt, contrary to being able to actually cultivate the four satipatthanas.

Nonetheless, I have heard this instruction from Ajahm Brahm in different forms, numerous times - it's hard to not to take it as the real pith. It is perhaps, as you suggested before, a less structured approach to entering the jhanas. I think there is a definite resonance with Dozgchen/Mahamudra approaches, but this does not imply they are the same.

All the best with your practice as well.
Not saying the TFT is devoid of relaxation sitting in Samadhi is very relaxing some of those Thai Forest Wats are pretty idyllic and nice places to go. I really enjoyed practicing it as a laymen in 2008/09.

I’m sure Ajahn Brahm’s teaching is very good to follow. Where I trained however it was complete opposite we had to always put forth effort. I think you get varying degrees of approach depending on the teachers take of the TFT so my perceptions are coloured a certain way.

Anyway life’s better and a lot more can be accomplished with a relaxed mind I reckon based on all my practice experience :twothumbsup:
It's an instruction I still need to really take on board; I'm prone to excessive effort/too much practice.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4602
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Aemilius »

The discussion so far largely refuses to address the main question, i.e. is Dzogchen or Tantra aiming at individual liberation (from the wheel of becoming), or are they prepared and willing take rebirth in samsara 1 000 000 000 times or more, if it is necessary for the liberation other beings?
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
Natan
Posts: 3685
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Natan »

One of the guys here posted a translation of Maitreya's sutras. In there you can clearly see in a terse format how Mahayana approaches the Four Noble Truths. The Four Immeasurables and Dependent origination are essential but not jhanas. The Six Perfections are in the path, but not ten bhumis, five paths or stages of an Arhant. What is laid out there is more or less what comes to all the opening prayers that Vajrayana uses. True this is part of the bodhisattva vehicle of cause and result. But as Malcolm said there's no Dzogchen without Mahayana Bodhicitta. If one knows about about Mahamudra and Dzogchen practice it becomes clear how one enters swiftly into wisdom contemplation to perfect all the dependent branches of awakening, completing merit and wisdom and living la vida Buddha. I don't think there's a clearer set of sutras on how to do Mahayana like a pro.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Malcolm »

Aemilius wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 1:03 pm The discussion so far largely refuses to address the main question, i.e. is Dzogchen or Tantra aiming at individual liberation (from the wheel of becoming), or are they prepared and willing take rebirth in samsara 1 000 000 000 times or more, if it is necessary for the liberation other beings?
The idea is to become a Buddha as fast as possible in order to reside in nonabiding nirvana in order to assist all sentient beings achieve buddhahood until samsara has been emptied from the bottom.
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4602
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Aemilius »

Crazywisdom wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 5:42 pm One of the guys here posted a translation of Maitreya's sutras. In there you can clearly see in a terse format how Mahayana approaches the Four Noble Truths. The Four Immeasurables and Dependent origination are essential but not jhanas. The Six Perfections are in the path, but not ten bhumis, five paths or stages of an Arhant. What is laid out there is more or less what comes to all the opening prayers that Vajrayana uses. True this is part of the bodhisattva vehicle of cause and result. But as Malcolm said there's no Dzogchen without Mahayana Bodhicitta. If one knows about about Mahamudra and Dzogchen practice it becomes clear how one enters swiftly into wisdom contemplation to perfect all the dependent branches of awakening, completing merit and wisdom and living la vida Buddha. I don't think there's a clearer set of sutras on how to do Mahayana like a pro.
I have read and The Five Works of Maitreya that exist in english translation. I had to spend some effort to get them all. They all exist in english translation, and it is possible to procure them. There is nothing in them that would somehow put down the meaning and importance of Dhyana or Concentration. The meaning of dhyana/samadhi is slightly or very much different in Mahayana compared with the Sravakayana. Mahayana sutras enumerate hundred different samadhis or dhyanas, that are known by name. Avatamsaka and Perfection of Wisdom sutras speak of "hundred thousand samadhis".

"After the noble bodhisattva Asanga performed the practice of Lord Maitreya for twelve human years, he met Maitreya face-to-face and was led to the heavenly realm of Tushita. Maitreya presented Asanga with five commentaries that comment upon the wisdom intent of all the words of the Victorious One. These five treatises are the Two Ornaments, the Two Treatises That Distinguish, and the Sublime Continuum", Mipham Rimpoche.

1. The Ornament of Clear Realization (Skt. Abhisamayālaṃkāra; Tib. མངོན་པར་རྟོགས་པའི་རྒྱན་; Trad. Chin. 現觀莊嚴論).

2. The Ornament of the Mahayana Sutras (Skt. Māhayānasūtrālaṃkāra; Tib. ཐེག་པ་ཆེན་པོའི་མདོ་སྡེ་རྒྱན་; Trad. Chin. 大乘莊嚴經論).

3. Distinguishing the Middle from the Extremes (Skt. Madhyāntavibhāga; Tib. དབུས་དང་མཐའ་རྣམ་པར་འབྱེད་པ་; Trad. Chin. 辨中邊論頌).

4. Distinguishing Dharma and Dharmata (Skt. Dharma-dharmatā-vibhāga; Tib. ཆོས་དང་ཆོས་ཉིད་རྣམ་པར་འབྱེད་པ་; Trad. Chin. 辨法法性論) is very brief and direct in its presentation and is included within the class of oral instructions.

5. The Sublime Continuum (Skt. Uttaratantra Śāstra; Tib. རྒྱུད་བླ་མ་; Trad. Chin. 分別寶性大乘無上續論).


"Indian Mahāyāna traditions refer to numerous forms of samādhi, for example, Section 21 of the Mahavyutpatti records 118 distinct forms of samādhi and the Samadhiraja Sutra has as its main theme a samādhi called 'the samādhi that is manifested as the sameness of the essential nature of all dharmas' (sarva-dharma-svabhavā-samatā-vipañcita-samādhi)". (wikipedia)
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
User avatar
Aemilius
Posts: 4602
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Mahayana vs Theravada

Post by Aemilius »

I can understand why we (the modern Dharma) are developing into the direction of disregarding and rejecting the dhyana states. It happens because we rely on scientific knowledge. And scientific knowledge relies on the sense perception of the five senses, which signifies Kamaloka of the buddhist world view. We have largely rejected the world and reality that has been revealed through the extra-sensory perception of yogis and meditators. Because of this the method of meditation has become disadvantageous and even useless. Buddhists have turned away from it. Instead we rely on rational scientific knowledge. We also rely on worldly (academic or other) authorities. We do not rely on mystical experiencers, who have praticed and experienced Dhyanas. There is also a complicated power struggle going on, under the surface, in religious international politics. Because of this, neither can we trust religious authorities or leaders (buddhist or other). We are bought and sold like cows or tokens.
svaha
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Sarvē mānavāḥ svatantrāḥ samutpannāḥ vartantē api ca, gauravadr̥śā adhikāradr̥śā ca samānāḥ ēva vartantē. Ētē sarvē cētanā-tarka-śaktibhyāṁ susampannāḥ santi. Api ca, sarvē’pi bandhutva-bhāvanayā parasparaṁ vyavaharantu."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1. (in english and sanskrit)
Post Reply

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”