What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

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.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 2920
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by PadmaVonSamba » Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:13 pm

It won't happen. One cannot practice with wrong view and expect anything other than error as a result.
That's simply didactic. If one can, then one can.

Why is it "wrong view" not to accept on faith alone, or simply because someone has said it, or simply because someone told you that the Buddha taught it, concepts such as hell realms and nagas, certain concepts of rebirth, and other things one cannot verify through one's personal experience?
Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"
The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth.
Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 26701
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by Malcolm » Sun Oct 15, 2017 3:24 pm

PadmaVonSamba wrote:
Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:13 pm
It won't happen. One cannot practice with wrong view and expect anything other than error as a result.
That's simply didactic. If one can, then one can.

Why is it "wrong view" not to accept on faith alone, or simply because someone has said it, or simply because someone told you that the Buddha taught it, concepts such as hell realms and nagas, certain concepts of rebirth, and other things one cannot verify through one's personal experience?

Simply put, it is wrong view to reject rebirth and karma because by doing so one rejects the dependent origination of the mind. Also, these things can be personally verified. You just have to do the work.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

pael
Posts: 464
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:49 pm

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by pael » Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:06 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Oct 15, 2017 3:24 pm
PadmaVonSamba wrote:
Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:13 pm
It won't happen. One cannot practice with wrong view and expect anything other than error as a result.
That's simply didactic. If one can, then one can.

Why is it "wrong view" not to accept on faith alone, or simply because someone has said it, or simply because someone told you that the Buddha taught it, concepts such as hell realms and nagas, certain concepts of rebirth, and other things one cannot verify through one's personal experience?

Simply put, it is wrong view to reject rebirth and karma because by doing so one rejects the dependent origination of the mind. Also, these things can be personally verified. You just have to do the work.
Does wrong view prevent four jhanas?
May all beings be free from suffering and causes of suffering

User avatar
Monlam Tharchin
Posts: 1637
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:11 am
Location: Oregon

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by Monlam Tharchin » Sun Oct 15, 2017 9:10 pm

The Buddha's teachers before his awakening guided him up through the four formless jhanas beyond the first four, and they were nonetheless still unawakened.

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1403
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by Coëmgenu » Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:05 pm

...and on the eighth kalpa, the Bhagavān made the Great Vehicle, and with it he was pleased, and the Bhagavān said, "It is good."

I'm sure it went something like that.
子念昔貧,志意下劣,今於父所,大獲珍寶,并及舍宅、一切財物。甚大歡喜,得未曾有。
The son thought of past poverty, outlook humble, now having from father a treasure harvest, also father's house, all his wealth. Great joy - to have what was never before had.

Τῆς πατρῴας, δόξης σου, ἀποσκιρτήσας ἀφρόνως, ἐν κακοῖς ἐσκόρπισα, ὅν μοι παρέδωκας πλοῦτον· ὅθεν σοι τὴν τοῦ Ἀσώτου, φωνὴν κραυγάζω· Ἥμαρτον ἐνώπιόν σου Πάτερ οἰκτίρμον, δέξαι με μετανοοῦντα, καὶ ποίησόν με, ὡς ἕνα τῶν μισθίων σου.
Your fatherly due I withheld unthinking, in evil I wasted your wealth; a prodigal cries, "I've erred, father, receive the repentant as serf."

妙法蓮華經 Κοντάκιον τοῦ Ἀσώτου

User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 2920
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by PadmaVonSamba » Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:15 am

No disagreement. Secular buddhism simply rejects what cannot be verified.
That, however doesn't mean that for many it isn't the right path.
It's better for people who simply can't bring themselves to believe in ghosts and gods
than it is to try to convince themselves that they do.

If nothing else, it establishes for them a connection with the dharma.
Since most people don't achieve perfect enlightenment in one lifetime anyway,
a secular connection isn't that far behind.
Further, to suggest that faith in that which cannot be verified is required,
I think essentially suggests that teachings which can be verified are insufficient.
Belief and non belief in that which cannot be directly perceived are both nothing more than activities of the mind.
Better dharma practice is to look at the true nature of the mind itself.
Better to be secular and know one's true nature than to imagine all the dieties and yet never really get the message
(and there are a lot like that).
...
Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"
The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth.
Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.

User avatar
Monlam Tharchin
Posts: 1637
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:11 am
Location: Oregon

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by Monlam Tharchin » Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:54 am

If one knows one's true nature, one has insight into Dependent Arising of the mind and therefore sees karma and rebirth for oneself.

It's one thing to remain agnostic about what we haven't yet seen, progressing step by step, even if it takes us a long time to arrive at insight. Who takes up the Dharma with wisdom fully formed already? None of us.
The phenomenon of Secular Buddhism is another matter entirely.
This is more eloquently explored than I could ever do in the thread on Secular Buddhism.

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9213
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by DGA » Mon Oct 16, 2017 1:23 am

PadmaVonSamba wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:15 am
Secular buddhism simply rejects what cannot be verified. [...]
It's better for people who simply can't bring themselves to believe in ghosts and gods
than it is to try to convince themselves that they do.
I disagree in the sense that secular Buddhism brings in a matrix of unverifiable content that has nothing really to do with Buddhism at all. It's really a novel religious movement, a new thing, rather than Diet Dharma. And you can verify these claims by considering what Tara Brach invites her readers to take refuge in as explained in her book True Refuge. This is of a piece with the Jungian musings of Jack Kornfield and Jon Kabat-Zinn (especially Wherever You Go, There You Are).

Other examples of what cannot be verified that is held to be true in the secular Buddhist scene can be categorized as follows: Claims Based in Popularizations of Neuroscience that are Speculative at Best. See: Buddha's Brain. This is in line with Daniel Goleman's work going back to the 1970s. "Secular Buddhism" is more about the imaginings of motivational speakers regarding neuroplasticity and the meditator's ability to "rewire" the brain than about any recognizable Buddhist content.
OM everybody's doin it
Please don't let them ruin it OM

Monlam Tharchin wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:54 am
If one knows one's true nature, one has insight into Dependent Arising of the mind and therefore sees karma and rebirth for oneself.

It's one thing to remain agnostic about what we haven't yet seen, progressing step by step, even if it takes us a long time to arrive at insight. Who takes up the Dharma with wisdom fully formed already? None of us.
The phenomenon of Secular Buddhism is another matter entirely.
This is more eloquently explored than I could ever do in the thread on Secular Buddhism.
:good:

thomaslaw
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by thomaslaw » Mon Oct 16, 2017 1:58 am

nichiren-123 wrote:
Tue Oct 10, 2017 5:52 pm
So I'm trying to understand how the different teachings relate to each other. I started with tientai's 5 periods but quickly realised that it wasn't historically accurate.
Realizing that the Mahayana doctrines aren't the words of the literal Buddha but later innovations, I wonder what the real Buddha, Sakyamuni would have thought about the Mahayana sutras? Do they hold true to the Buddha's meaning or would he have thought of them as wrong? What do you guys think?
The origin of the essential Mahayana doctrines (such as the middle way of emptiness, conditioned arising) is found in Samyutta/Samyukta-Nikaya/Agama. See The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study based on the Sutra-anga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyukta-agama (by Choong Mun-keat, Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000).
:buddha1:

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 26701
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by Malcolm » Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:02 am

PadmaVonSamba wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:15 am
Secular buddhism simply rejects what cannot be verified.
Their means of verification are faulty.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 26701
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by Malcolm » Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:04 am

thomaslaw wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 1:58 am
The origin of the essential Mahayana doctrines (such as the middle way of emptiness, conditioned arising) is found in Samyutta/Samyukta-Nikaya/Agama. See The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study based on the Sutra-anga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyukta-agama (by Choong Mun-keat, Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000).

No, the origin of the essential Mahāyāna doctrines is the Buddha's realization of the dependently originated nature, and therefore nonarising nature, of all conditioned phenomena.

It does not come from books. It comes from realization.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
liuzg150181
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 7:41 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by liuzg150181 » Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:22 am

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:02 am
PadmaVonSamba wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:15 am
Secular buddhism simply rejects what cannot be verified.
Their means of verification are faulty.
So how do one verify,through meditative equipoise?

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 26701
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by Malcolm » Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:35 am

liuzg150181 wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:22 am
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:02 am
PadmaVonSamba wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:15 am
Secular buddhism simply rejects what cannot be verified.
Their means of verification are faulty.
So how do one verify,through meditative equipoise?
One must verify the Buddha's teaching through one's own realization. Until that point, one must accept on faith the testimony of others who have realized those teachings. Hence the necessity for a qualified teacher in Buddhadharma in general.

The Buddha clearly discusses this, in among other places, the (inconvenient) Eastern Gatehouse Sutta.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
liuzg150181
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 7:41 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by liuzg150181 » Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:43 am

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:35 am
liuzg150181 wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:22 am
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:02 am


Their means of verification are faulty.
So how do one verify,through meditative equipoise?
One must verify the Buddha's teaching through one's own realization. Until that point, one must accept on faith the testimony of others who have realized those teachings. Hence the necessity for a qualified teacher in Buddhadharma in general.

The Buddha clearly discusses this, in among other places, the (inconvenient) Eastern Gatehouse Sutta.
I see.
And yes,I know that even the Mahayana sutras mention abt the importance of being guided by a qualified teacher,(or even preferably a realized one),though Vajrayana takes this to the full nine yards.
Eastern Gatehouse Sutta as in Pubbakotthaka Sutta? Why incovenient though?

thomaslaw
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 am
Location: Australia

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by thomaslaw » Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:00 am

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:04 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 1:58 am
The origin of the essential Mahayana doctrines (such as the middle way of emptiness, conditioned arising) is found in Samyutta/Samyukta-Nikaya/Agama. See The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study based on the Sutra-anga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyukta-agama (by Choong Mun-keat, Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000).

No, the origin of the essential Mahāyāna doctrines is the Buddha's realization of the dependently originated nature, and therefore nonarising nature, of all conditioned phenomena.

It does not come from books. It comes from realization.
It certainly first comes from the Buddha's 'realization' of 'conditioned arising' and also 'ceasing' nature, indicated in the books, Samyukta/Samyutta.

pael
Posts: 464
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:49 pm

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by pael » Mon Oct 16, 2017 7:27 am

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:35 am
Hence the necessity for a qualified teacher in Buddhadharma in general.
How about in particular?
May all beings be free from suffering and causes of suffering

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9213
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by DGA » Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:17 pm

thomaslaw wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:00 am
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:04 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 1:58 am
The origin of the essential Mahayana doctrines (such as the middle way of emptiness, conditioned arising) is found in Samyutta/Samyukta-Nikaya/Agama. See The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study based on the Sutra-anga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyukta-agama (by Choong Mun-keat, Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000).

No, the origin of the essential Mahāyāna doctrines is the Buddha's realization of the dependently originated nature, and therefore nonarising nature, of all conditioned phenomena.

It does not come from books. It comes from realization.
It certainly first comes from the Buddha's 'realization' of 'conditioned arising' and also 'ceasing' nature, indicated in the books, Samyukta/Samyutta.
I don't understand your position here.

Are you claiming that Buddha's realization came from his study of particular texts?

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 26701
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by Malcolm » Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:29 pm

thomaslaw wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 4:00 am
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:04 am
thomaslaw wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 1:58 am
The origin of the essential Mahayana doctrines (such as the middle way of emptiness, conditioned arising) is found in Samyutta/Samyukta-Nikaya/Agama. See The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study based on the Sutra-anga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyukta-agama (by Choong Mun-keat, Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000).

No, the origin of the essential Mahāyāna doctrines is the Buddha's realization of the dependently originated nature, and therefore nonarising nature, of all conditioned phenomena.

It does not come from books. It comes from realization.
It certainly first comes from the Buddha's 'realization' of 'conditioned arising' and also 'ceasing' nature, indicated in the books, Samyukta/Samyutta.

Why scare quotes?

And why site the Samyukta Agama as being particularly relevant to Mahāyāna Doctrines?

The record of Buddha's Mahāyāna teachings are found Mahāyāna Sūtras.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 15986
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by Grigoris » Tue Oct 17, 2017 10:19 am

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:35 am
The Buddha clearly discusses this, in among other places, the (inconvenient) Eastern Gatehouse Sutta.
Thanks for the heads-up!

For those that want to read the Pubbakotthaka Sutta (Eastern Gatehouse Sutta): https://studybuddhism.com/en/tibetan-bu ... rp-weapons
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 2920
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?

Post by PadmaVonSamba » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:08 pm

It is not necessary to believe that a hungry ghost realm with cognizant beings in it exists in order to realize the true nature of one's mind.
If, through practice, a realization happens that a hungry ghost realm with cognizant beings in it exists, then it is verified.
But whether one exists or not has no bearing on my looking directly at my own mind.
For some, not being reborn as a hungry ghost might be needed motivation for practice
but for others, it is an unnecessary complication of thoughts.
...
Last edited by PadmaVonSamba on Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"
The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth.
Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests