Hi Aloka-D,
The Mahayana schools arose in response (IMHO) to philosophical pressure from certain Buddhist sects who broke ranks with Buddha and started to posit some kind of base of existence. These Hinayana schools no longer exist but the debates which were used to refute them are still taught to monks and can be equally applied to defeat Hindus.

The theory of the two truths was the weapon used to combat this notion, with emptiness the crowning position.

All well and good, as long as you don't forget that it is a useful theory and not an ultimate truth or basis.

The term is used for Theravada, Kris.

From the glossary of ''The Practice of Tranquility and Insight'' by Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche ''.........


"HINAYANA (Tib. tekpa chungwa) - Literally, "the lesser vehicle". The term refers to the first teachings of the Buddha, which emphasised the careful examination of mind and its confusion; also called the Theravadin path"

I do not see it this way at all. I see little difference.

The Buddha taught 'not-self', like you say to a child: "don't touch that thing, it is not yours".

Emptiness is seeing the five aggregates or the sense bases are empty of any 'self' but examining those things with direct insight.

Little difference really.

Not-self (anatta) was taught together with impermanence & unsatisfactoriness where as emptiness (sunnata) was taught on its own.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/grin.gif

Empty of "independent existence" seems to imply an interconnected existence. It is still existence or 'self', but a 'collective self', like an attached husband or wife cannot fathom life independent of their partner.

My feeling is, for the Buddha, emptiness meant when the mind really looks very acutely at something, no self can be found in there.

That is why the Buddha chose quite specific dhammas when referring to emptiness, such as the eye, ear, eye consciousness, etc.

My sense of it is his intention was for things to be examined very closely rather than Ananda's broad cosmic statement "the world is empty".

For me, the Buddha encouraged us to look very closely for the emptiness (rather than develop a cosmic theory).

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/grin.gif

Thanks Element. Yes, it's a pity when it starts to slide that way. It becomes all about opinion *correct* opinion of course!!! (read MY opinion) etc etc. Been there, got the T-Shirthttp://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/wink.gif

It may be a kind of inevitable human trap. I tend to think it happens when one loses touch, for whatever reason, with the daily insight within meditation.http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

I know it gets used that way Aloka-D, but it's incorrect on all counts, even from a Mahayana POV. Hinayana were the two 'lower' schools, within the tenets system and never referred to anything else.

The use of this term for the Theravadan school is ignorant and pejorative.http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

Oh sure, I already know that and feel deeply disturbed that it's used.

I'm a Therevadan,and personally l don't care what others call my form of practise. I don't understand the issue.

That's excellent that you just get on with your practice regardless, Frank.

However some people find the term 'Hinayana' or 'Lesser vehicle' as opposed to Mahayana "Greater Vehicle " very insulting.

Haven't time to go into it now....gotta dash. http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/wave.gif

Thanks.. andyrobyn.
I have heard :-
- It is easy.
- Like hair blind the mountain.
- It is infront of but don't see.
- No need to understand my words, but what ever arise to your mind just know.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

The split point to 2 Nikaya was happen about 100 years after Buddha death.

The Second Council convenes in Vesali to discuss controversial points of Vinaya. The first schism of the Sangha occurs, in which the Mahasanghika school parts ways with the traditionalist Sthaviravadins. At issue is the Mahasanghika's reluctance to accept the Suttas and the Vinaya as the final authority on the Buddha's teachings. This schism marks the first beginnings of what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism.

The Second Council

For my understanding :-

Theravadin : Try to keep original teaching of Buddha. If somebody need to write something more, can not write in Tipitaka, should write in Atthakatha. Then, if we read mahayana Tipitaka, we will find Theravadin Tipitaka about 1/3 and the other 2/3 was different.

Mahayana : The great vihicle, because many of mahayana address to Bodhisattva, Need to be a Buddha. (Exclude Zen) The famous mahayana in Thailand is Guan Yin who pretend to help everyone to Nippana and she will be the last one.

Theravada call Mahayana, Acariyavada (may wrong spell) mean teacher's teaching.(Theravada mean Thera's teaching - Thera mean the elder monks at the 2nd council convenes)

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

If original mind is equated, in the suttas, with nibbana, then all original mind would be is consciousness free of clinging, right? How one experiences it may vary from person to person and result in different descriptions. If one attaches this original mind to some other concept then, I say, it is not the consciousness one has in nibbana -- how can it be, if it is attached to something?

Find me a Sutta which teaches sunnata without reference to anatta.

Why would she "pretend to help everyone"?
Personally l have a bit of a problem with sages/seers who make the claim that they will be the "last" of a kind.
In lslam Mohammed made such a claim.
Unless you have some great insight into the end of days,l feel that such claims are presumptuous.

Well, it isn't presumption so much as an ideal of humility.

Not sure how claiming to be the "last" in a continuum can be ascribed to "humility"
Sounds more like arrogance.