[Hinigyday]

Yes sir, you are correct. And that was my mistake. Thank you for pointing out my delusion.

Those who will not learn from the past are doomed to repeat their mistakes in the future. The real mistake is in the view underlying the action. In your case this conceit of mahayana superiority and the delusion, "paying attention to the teachings of the Buddha is 'fundamentalism'" are the mistakes that will hinder you for a long time.


SN 20.7
PTS: S ii 266
CDB i 708

Ani Sutta: The Peg

"Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained. [1]

"In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works — the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples — are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.

"In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — will come about.

"Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata — deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness — are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves."

[popsicesHoupe]

The placing of the OP (within the Theravadan forum) explains how the term is inappropriately applied to the Theravadan school. Applied correctly (to two defunct sects, whose tenets are preserved within the Mahayana corpus) for the purpose of study it is perfectly acceptable.

This is the correct context of the term "Hinayana" and is the only legitimate use of it.

[freediscountplanrrxip]

The placing of the OP (within the Theravadan forum) explains how the term is inappropriately applied to the Theravadan school. Applied correctly (to two defunct sects, whose tenets are preserved within the Mahayana corpus) for the purpose of study it is perfectly acceptable.

This is the correct context of the term "Hinayana" and is the only legitimate use of it.

And who in mahayana or the tibetan religions actually uses this term in this "legitimate" context?

[Jerwittdergut]

And who in mahayana or the tibetan religions actually uses this term in this "legitimate" context?

Strictly speaking that would be a question to pose in the Mahayana forum but as it hardly merits a thread there, I'll reply here.
The term is used legitimately by those studying the tenets to designate the long defunct Vaibhashika and Sautrantika schools.

[adarmaSen]

Strictly speaking that would be a question to pose in the Mahayana forum but as it hardly merits a thread there, I'll reply here.
The term is used legitimately by those studying the tenets to designate the long defunct Vaibhashika and Sautrantika schools.

I'll re-phrase.

How much do we see this notion used in its "legitimate" context, vs. it being abused and used to slander the Theravada sects and/or the liberative teachings of the Buddha?

...a "ball-park" guesstimate of percentage would do...

[Ervins Dervish]

More about 'Hinayana' from a different Tibetan Buddhist school to the one which was mentioned #2


Hinayana practitioners are those who find samsara unbearable and want to escape from it into the state of nirvana. They help others enormously by renouncing the world and striving to obtain freedom, but their main thought is personal liberation from samsara.

An arhat—one who has completed this path of personal liberation—has many spiritual powers, and can give spiritual teaching and aid to many beings, but still has to remove jneyavarana. The attainment of nirvana will prove not to be sufficient and the arhat will then have to enter the bodhisattva path and progress through the ten levels to the final, complete buddhahood.

Those who practise Mahayana also renounce samsara and want to escape from it. But because they identify with all other beings in samsara, Mahayanists do not want merely personal liberation.

Through their great concern for others, Mahayanists' all-motivating wish is to give complete happiness to all beings. They understand first that all beings in samsara—insects, devas and the rest—are equal in that they all want happiness and do not want suffering. They also perceive that none of these beings has the satisfaction of complete happiness.

For this reason, they develop the great wish to take all beings out of suffering. This wish, which is also a kind of caitta, is called mahakarunika, "the great compassionate one." Mahayana practitioners realize that all beings in samsara, though they may have transitory happiness, do not have true, lasting, happiness.

The next wish, that of giving all beings the ultimate happiness of buddhahood is called mahamaitreya, "the great wish of active love." These wishes are stronger than the dissatisfaction of the Hinayana follower. Before this stage of aspiration is reached, there are many other practices that have to be developed so that Mahayanists can fully realize the suffering of beings.

more here:

http://www.fpmt.org/teachings/more/bod_rabten.php


Personally, in these instances, I think that generating metta and karuna is always appropriate towards those who might appear to have delusions of superiority over others.

[Marinausa]

...a "ball-park" guesstimate of percentage would do...

Hi Stuka,
I wouldn't know percentage wise but I have seen it banded about in a casual manner on discussion boards. Usually by people who haven't got much, if any, knowledge of the tenets and even less of the Theravada. It's this casual 'assumed-correct' usage, as much as the deliberate attacks, which I find odious.

[BipiewExifese]

Personally, in these instances, I think that generating metta and karuna is always appropriate towards those who might appear to have delusions of superiority over others.

Yes Aloka.

and once again... the glorious Boddhisatva v.s. the selfish and barren Arahat...

personally these comparisons seems to be mere delusions... by any means the use of Hinayana is contemptible.

[usaguedriedax]

An arhat—one who has completed this path of personal liberation—has many spiritual powers, and can give spiritual teaching and aid to many beings, but still has to remove jneyavarana. The attainment of nirvana will prove not to be sufficient and the arhat will then have to enter the bodhisattva path and progress through the ten levels to the final, complete buddhahood.

This remembers my brothers [in my childhood] arguing which superhero was the best of all... Batman or Superman.

[tq4F7YKs]

More about 'Hinayana' from a different Tibetan Buddhist school to the one which was mentioned #2

From the same source:

.To reach the final goal we need two instruments: prajna (wisdom), and upaya (right means), which contains both compassion and compassionate activity. 13 Mahakarunika, mahamaitreya, adicinta and bodhicitta are all included in upaya. Prajna is seeing things as they really are. A bodhisattva must have both of these. Arhats, who have completed the Hinayana path, are out of samsara and have attained the lowest level of nirvana, are strong in prajna—in the realization of emptiness—but weak in upaya. They have compassion (karuna), but not the great compassion of mahakarunika. They have active love (maitri), but not mahamaitreya. The main difference between their path and that of the Mahayana is on the side of upaya. Eventually, arhats will have to develop it.

[sposicke]

Those who will not learn from the past are doomed to repeat their mistakes in the future. The real mistake is in the view underlying the action. In your case this conceit of mahayana superiority and the delusion, "paying attention to the teachings of the Buddha is 'fundamentalism'" are the mistakes that will hinder you for a long time.

sigh...

There have been many teachers since the Buddha. My view is just fine. Please don't judge me or try to teach me. I have a teacher already and am not in need of your fundamentalist pronouncements. You don't know me and are in no way qualified to decide whether I possess "Mahayana conceit" or not. Your behavior is very similar to Namdrol's at e-sangha and is boorish at best. Fortunately, you do not possess the ability to make posts disappear and to ban people. I shudder to think of what this place might be like if you did. Ah well...round and round.
Good luck,
Keith

edit: I am sure this post will draw the ire of the mods here, deservedly so. It is a ad hom attack. In my defence, I tried to drop it and admit that I was wrong for posting here. And I am certainly not the first person to feel that Stuka's posts are very heavy handed and discourage discussion.

[7kitthuptarill]

I don't know why people can't get on like reasonable human beings instead of making snarky and emotional ad hom attacks in a discussion when they're displeased with something.

Focus on the content of the post and not the poster.... and lighten up, let go... and relax for goodness sake !

[Belindanan]

I don't know why people can't get on like reasonable human beings instead of making emotional ad hom attacks in a discussion when they're displeased with each other.

Lighten up for goodness sake !

It's a touchy subject and being a Mahayana practitioner, I made a mistake posting in this forum. Sorry. I thought the point of this forum was to have contact with other traditions, something that I enjoy. Unfortunately, certain traditions are made to feel very uncomfortable here. This isn't my own view, I have recieved pm's from other participants to this effect as well. What can you do? Lightening up a bit seems like a good start.

Keith

[AccusaJalsBub]

Hi Keith,

If you were posting in the Mahayana forum then your views have to be respected - similarly for Theravadins in this forum. General forums are for everyone and Beyond Belief is for debating which might sometimes get a little edgey.

Who is making people uncomfortable at this website? Not the staff I hope.

Nor is it my responsiblity as owner if some members can't really cope with debate and then have hissy fits ! Would you want me to try to control everything ? Sounds a lot like e-sangha mentality to me.

with metta,

Aloka

[CruzIzabella]

Hi Keith,

Sincerely I do not see any reason to be upset here. If one is into a given tradition, for example, Soto in my case, some posts in the past were about tough comments and I know that Zen circles as any others are susceptible to criticism and that should not be understood as a personal attack. Any tradition, to say Mahayana, Zen, Tibetan, Theravada, Pure Land, etc... and also "personal" teachers, have their issues and all we have to be aware of those facts.

Also we have to differentiate from the way one is posting and from the content it is posted. We are exposed to criticism any time we wrote an opinion or any time a posture is taken. Neither one nor the other criticisms are of any harm mostly if people here, as you said, know nothing of each other. Forums need to have their proper place in the list of important things in our lives.

[GrileVege]

And I am certainly not the first person to feel that Stuka's posts are very heavy handed and discourage discussion.

Hi Keith

Sure, Stuka's posting style can have some 'edge' at times but that's his style.

I personally enjoy debating Stuka, show Stuka no special bias and regard Stuka the same as everyone else.

All situations are those where we can practise, especially non-attachment and light heartedness.

With metta

[itititit]

Folks,

Just look at the activity level in the Mahayana forum. It is dead. Every conversation ends with "the Buddha didn't teach that". This place will never be a quality, open forum until all views are respected and posters cease to be brow beaten with requests for Pali quotes and adherence to a very narrow interpretation of Buddhism. Again, this isn't just my opinion. One poster, who has since left here, sent me a message saying the he was moving his conversations to Dharma Wheel because the Mahayana view is not respected and is in fact, disrespected. Sadly, I can't argue with that.

Keith

[Rupeviv]

That wasn't very nice of me to say, but I am ok with being the bad guy if it serves as some kind of wake up call. It is impossible to discuss things here.

[sbgctsa]

I personally enjoy debating Stuka and show Stuka no special bias. Sure... everybody has its very personal temper when stating an opinion... things should be taken like that.

For example, Jazz... some people do not like Dizzie's and love Miles... or the other way...

[Percocetti]

One poster, who has since left here, sent me a message saying the he was moving his conversations to Dharma Wheel

Oh, lol, I bet that was fojiao2 - now PadmaVonSamba at DW. As well as frequent trolling, he was often so offensive in some of his own postings here that they had to be deleted !