DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Mahayana and Theravada? Which did Shakyamuni teach? (my opinion)

**Viafdrear** · 11-22-2011, 02:12 PM

I think in the context of this thread, its worth reading this article "The Myth of Hinayana " (a pejorative term when use by Mahayana/Vajrayana people to describe Theravada)

In the centuries around the birth of Christ there was a radical development going on in Buddhism. A new school was born, and its adherents called it Mahayana. How this new school differed from the earlier schools, can be found in any history of Buddhism. Here we will concentrate on one of the results of this schism: the term Hinayana.

The adherents of the older schools criticized the Mahayanists, especially for creating new sutras, forging the word of the Buddha. The Mahayanists on the other side reacted to that critique by accusing their opponents of not understanding the teaching of the Buddha at all and for beeing narrowminded egoists. The debate got heated, and accusations flowed from both sides. Then some brilliant person at the Mahayana side of the debate created the word pair Mahayana/Hinayana, and it stuck. They called their opponents Hinayana, and this word worked excellently as an insult – with a simplicity and a parallellity to Mahayana that any fool could grasp.

Hinayana, or, more correctly, hiinayaana, is a highly derogatory term. It does not simply mean "Lesser vehicle" as one often can see stated. The second element of hiina-yaana – that is yaana – means vehicle. But hiina very seldom has the simple meaning of "lesser" or "small". If that had been the case, the Pali (or Sanskrit) texts would have used it in other connections as an opposite of mahaa – big. But they don't. The opposite of mahaa is cuu.la, so this is the normal word for "small".

The term Hinayana is an echo of a debate long dead – or rather a debate where the one party is dead and the other one is shouting to the winds.

Continued:

http://www.lienet.no/hinayan1.htm
.

11-22-2011, 02:12 PM	#11
Viafdrear Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 474 Senior Member	I think in the context of this thread, its worth reading this article "The Myth of Hinayana " (a pejorative term when use by Mahayana/Vajrayana people to describe Theravada) In the centuries around the birth of Christ there was a radical development going on in Buddhism. A new school was born, and its adherents called it Mahayana. How this new school differed from the earlier schools, can be found in any history of Buddhism. Here we will concentrate on one of the results of this schism: the term Hinayana. The adherents of the older schools criticized the Mahayanists, especially for creating new sutras, forging the word of the Buddha. The Mahayanists on the other side reacted to that critique by accusing their opponents of not understanding the teaching of the Buddha at all and for beeing narrowminded egoists. The debate got heated, and accusations flowed from both sides. Then some brilliant person at the Mahayana side of the debate created the word pair Mahayana/Hinayana, and it stuck. They called their opponents Hinayana, and this word worked excellently as an insult – with a simplicity and a parallellity to Mahayana that any fool could grasp. Hinayana, or, more correctly, hiinayaana, is a highly derogatory term. It does not simply mean "Lesser vehicle" as one often can see stated. The second element of hiina-yaana – that is yaana – means vehicle. But hiina very seldom has the simple meaning of "lesser" or "small". If that had been the case, the Pali (or Sanskrit) texts would have used it in other connections as an opposite of mahaa – big. But they don't. The opposite of mahaa is cuu.la, so this is the normal word for "small". The term Hinayana is an echo of a debate long dead – or rather a debate where the one party is dead and the other one is shouting to the winds. Continued: http://www.lienet.no/hinayan1.htm .
	Quote