|
Sheikh Djibouti posted:It turns out the government of China is even more powerful than anyone had thought: It's amazing how much that one little man chaps their clenched asses. Hilarious, in fact.
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
Anyone here got any good online texts or resources detailing Buddhist art conventions? Like, how to distinguish one Buddha from another by way of their ornaments and so on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 03:22
|
|
|
Not online and kind of expensive, but within my lineage this book is a great scholarly resource on that topic. I'll ask a friend of mine who is into this art if he knows anything. Also, as a general PSA, I recently downloaded a very promising looking app for android that has a very good calendar called Dharma Treasure. Unfortunately, when I decided to poke around at what else it has, it is full of practices that require initiations as well as protector practices for a certain demon. If you're of the more superstitious bent it should certainly be avoided. If anyone knows of a very good Tibetan calendar app, please share. I can no longer find the one I had been using on the android app store.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 13:32
|
|
|
Dharma Treasure is the best I have found, although the Drukpa Lunar Calender was just released. It is free for 15 days, but you have to purchase after that Dharma Treasure isn't too bad though, it has a little bit about reading Tibetan and four books (in English) that I haven't read yet. I did notice a lot of entries under 'scriptures', but it is all in Tibetan , which a you describe it sounds like it might be a good thing Dr.Caligari fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Mar 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Dr.Caligari posted:Dharma Treasure is the best I have found, although the Drukpa Lunar Calender was just released. Thank you for the Drukpa Lunar Calendar tip! I have the eBook copy of their calendar and that calendar is very good. Dharma Treasure has a great calendar but the protector practices are for a demon that New Kadampa cultists follow and it's bad news bears for followers of authentic dharma. Edit: it looks like Drukpa calendar is built on the framework of the calendar I was using which explains why the other was removed from market. Looks like the Drukpa just got the rights to that and made it their own.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 15:56
|
|
|
Can you elaborate on these demon protector practice thingers?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Can you elaborate on these demon protector practice thingers? Briefly it includes practices of a particular Gelug protector that Holiness the Dalai Lama has urged not to practice. Followers of this particular protector have been associated with the violent obstruction of Rime, the open tradition of sharing among Buddhist schools, as the demon called for his followers to abandon all other protectors and rely on him exclusively. The New Kadampa cult, which has worked closely with the Chinese in attempting to obstruct HHDL, are associated with the demon, and there are other Gelug schools in various degrees of affiliation with the mainstream Gelug establishment that practice him. In the 1930s, one of his main followers decided he was a fully enlightened being, instead of a worldly protector, causing a load of problems. Needless to say there are of course issues in a worldly being being represented as a fully enlightened Buddha for the purposes of refuge practices. It's unfortunately difficult to find authentic information in any kind of "wiki" format because the NKT cult tries very hard to scrub that information and has the support of the Chinese government in doing so, but a little research should find more. I am certain the practices have been discussed previously in this thread but it's best to just leave them alone I think. If someone else wants to elaborate or add some clarity as I realize I'm being very vague, intentionally so, they can of course do so, but it's really all a Gelug problem, so they can have it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
Politics by any other name
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
NeilPerry posted:Anyone here got any good online texts or resources detailing Buddhist art conventions? Like, how to distinguish one Buddha from another by way of their ornaments and so on. They all look the same to me.....
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:How to cut off Nagarjuna's head Thanks for that post! This made me think of what I think is a story from the Jatakas about the current incarnation encountering a starving lioness about to eat her cubs and letting himself be eaten instead so she won't commit cannibalism- hopefully that sounds familiar to someone. It seems like a lot of these accounts are describing a pretty counterintuitive level of nonattachment where almost any circumstance warrants sacrificing your own life to benefit another being. I assume there were a variety of ways Nagarjuna could have hypothetically dealt with that situation. What i'm wondering is: ethically speaking, why was instructing another being how to kill him preferable to, say, a brief lecture on why being king is not a worthy goal to strive for? And carrying that a bit further, does ultimate nonattachment mean that making moral judgments is irrelevant/unnecessary? Is there any situation where it would not be appropriate to give up your life for someone, and does the answer change if you're a Buddha?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 07:34
|
|
|
Can you meditate while also doing an exercise routine, or is it better to stay still and relax? Just asking because if I combined my exercise time with my meditation time I'd have more time to play Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 08:44
|
|
|
Traditional meditation methods from the Suttas state that there are four postures: sitting and walking meditation which are the most common, but also standing and laying down. Those postures are the positions in which you can work with whatever meditation object you happen to be using. I think you can certainly engage in other activities by doing them with a deliberate and mindful approach, and that is probably a good way to cultivate beneficial mental states. I don't know if they would be considered actual meditation but it certainly can't hurt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 10:22
|
|
|
I have been enjoying Ajahn Brahm's videos. He is wise, compassionate and down-to-earth. I like it how he offers a perspective of how Buddhism can be applied to everyday life. Lately I've been interested in knowing more about Hinduism and Taoism. Are there videos by any good speakers of those religions? I'd rather learn about the subject that way than by reading a dusty 500 page book.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 12:05
|
|
|
You should at least read Tao Te Ching, a whopping 128 pages according to wikipedia (I have it on my dusty kindle) but it's broken down into small chapters if you really hate reading that much. It's also available for free online but I don't know how good the translation is. Besides, the Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
Rurik posted:I have been enjoying Ajahn Brahm's videos. He is wise, compassionate and down-to-earth. I like it how he offers a perspective of how Buddhism can be applied to everyday life. For any Buddhist, there is one dusty tome you really should take in and that is the translation of the Yoga Sutras by Bryant. It's lengthy, but includes comparative discussion highlighting doctrinal differences from Buddhism, as well as an overview of Hindu schools of thought that will be helpful as you consult other sources. By their nature, the Sutras do include a discussion of siddhis (which I think most people either disregard or view as metaphorical), as well as material on the efficacy of devotional practice (bhakti). Despite these, and despite the metaphysical architecture that underlies the Sutras, the system remains fundamentally one of practice and effect: Behave ethically, meditate, awaken and obtain (perhaps) some respite from karma. It thus serves as an interesting counterpoint to the Buddhist approach. After that, and because they are quick reading, I'd suggest you take in the Gita and a collection of Upanishads. There are many translations available, but the popular translations by Easwaran are a fine place to start.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Frykte posted:Can you meditate while also doing an exercise routine, or is it better to stay still and relax? Just asking because if I combined my exercise time with my meditation time I'd have more time to play Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup. The Sakyong has a good book called "Running with the Mind of Meditation" which is all about combining post-meditation practices with exercise, in particular running. I've never read it but friends who have told me they found it really helpful. Also, in regards to Hinduism/Taoism, if you're interested in the latter and are up for dusty tome digging, Eva Wong has some great books on the subject which are comprehensive and will give you a good overview. Unfortunately I don't know of any videos to that effect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
I used to play a lot of First Person Shooters like Team Fortress 2 and Quake, but lately I've been playing thinking games like frozen synapse or mindfulness games like Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup. I like how in DC:SS it isn't about fast reactions or aiming but rather just paying constant attention over a long period of time and not making one single bad decision. If you get impatient and start mashing the same button because of lag, your character will likely be killed by an ogre early in the game. It's easy to lose attention and die from hubris just like how in meditation if you lose focus just for a second your mind will drift onto other things. Does anyone know of any other video games that cultivate mindfulness skills? (Besides most other rogue-likes of course) edit: One more thing is that losing high level characters that you've invested 10+ hours into hurts a lot. The first time I lost my first level 27 (the maximum level) character which as a Deep Elf I was catatonic for days but having this happen so often helps me build up a strong non-attachment. Lonny Donoghan fucked around with this message at 08:13 on Mar 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 08:19
|
|
|
Hey all, so I was at a dharma talk yesterday and the teacher briefly mentioned that when the Buddha first ran into the five ascetics that would later become his first real disciples, when he first encountered them, he spoke a couple of words but none of the five could make heads or tails of what he said. Then, realizing he needed to communicate a little more skillfully, he gave his first real teachings to them. I can't find any more information on this personally after doing some searching, does anybody know what the words were that the teacher might have been referencing? If it helps, this was all within a Vajrayana practice center, so perhaps these first "baffling words" were a later account, rather than something that strictly appears in the Pali Canon and earlier texts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
The Dark Wind posted:Hey all, so I was at a dharma talk yesterday and the teacher briefly mentioned that when the Buddha first ran into the five ascetics that would later become his first real disciples, when he first encountered them, he spoke a couple of words but none of the five could make heads or tails of what he said. Then, realizing he needed to communicate a little more skillfully, he gave his first real teachings to them. I can't find any more information on this personally after doing some searching, does anybody know what the words were that the teacher might have been referencing? If it helps, this was all within a Vajrayana practice center, so perhaps these first "baffling words" were a later account, rather than something that strictly appears in the Pali Canon and earlier texts. Pretty sure they are a later addition to the story. The earliest version of the story of the Buddha's austerities and his interactions with the five ascetics is described in the Ariyapariyesana Sutta and the Maha-Saccaka Sutta. Probably a few other places as well that I can't think of. In all of the accounts I have heard, the issue with the ascetics comes from their idea that the Buddha has taken the easy way out by following the middle path, which they initially perceive as too luxurious, but I don't recall any incidents of them not understanding the teachings outright. I'm not sure if that is the way things are described in later traditions. Perhaps the idea of the ascetics not understanding the Buddha has something to do with them not understanding his new path. I'm not sure but I would be interested in knowing if any Vajrayana people could shed some light.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
I've been meditating daily for a few weeks now, and I finally felt something different. Whatever it was, it was simultaneously cool but calming. Only problem was I got so excited I pretty much lost the tranquility I was hoping to sustain  . My meditations since then have been a little stressful because i'm eager to hit that state, but I know that anticipation only pushes me back in that sense. Is there anything I can do to "check" my excitement at the door and stop getting frustrated?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
By keeping in mind that that kind of feeling isn't the goal and is in fact a distraction. During meditation lots of feelings can come or go, some enjoyable, some not enjoyable, but they are all just conceptual phenomena. So return to your meditative focus and let them go without grasping. This is where the actual benefit comes, training the mind not to chase after this or that feeling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Avocados posted:I've been meditating daily for a few weeks now, and I finally felt something different. Whatever it was, it was simultaneously cool but calming. Only problem was I got so excited I pretty much lost the tranquility I was hoping to sustain I always found the advice of "touch and go" to be extremely helpful. Whatever comes up, whether it's that excitement, that sensation of tranquility itself, or really any other feeling, you notice the sensation be with it fully, but then you let it go, without analyzing or fixating on it. Easier said than done, but I find that just keeping that phrase and attitude in the back of my mind does me wonders, as it's so easy to get caught up in trying to find that feeling again that your meditation becomes claustrophobic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Crack posted:Besides, the Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.  Good one.Thanks for the recommendations, people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 07:44
|
|
|
I plan on getting started on a rakusu soon. Do they tell you what is expected of you when you start on one? Like, I know that a finished rakusu ends with a ceremony so you may pubicly take vows and precepts, but do they usually go over them ahead of time so that you may practice them while working on the rakusu?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 14:23
|
|
|
The Dark Wind posted:I always found the advice of "touch and go" to be extremely helpful. Whatever comes up, whether it's that excitement, that sensation of tranquility itself, or really any other feeling, you notice the sensation be with it fully, but then you let it go, without analyzing or fixating on it. Easier said than done, but I find that just keeping that phrase and attitude in the back of my mind does me wonders, as it's so easy to get caught up in trying to find that feeling again that your meditation becomes claustrophobic. What I've found is that's actually a pretty good attitude to have for life as well. When good poo poo comes along enjoy the crap out of it but don't cling to it; it will leave when it must. Let it go.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
http://www.darkbuddhism.com/
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 04:47
|
|
|
The Dark Wind posted:I always found the advice of "touch and go" to be extremely helpful. Whatever comes up, whether it's that excitement, that sensation of tranquility itself, or really any other feeling, you notice the sensation be with it fully, but then you let it go, without analyzing or fixating on it. Easier said than done, but I find that just keeping that phrase and attitude in the back of my mind does me wonders, as it's so easy to get caught up in trying to find that feeling again that your meditation becomes claustrophobic. What I've discovered recently is that there is a bit of an ongoing debate about mindfulness and what exactly it means - i.e., does it refer to "bare attention", or to something more than that? More than a few teachers have described mindfulness as the act of giving your body, mind, feelings, and mental phenomena your full attention without judgement or getting involved. However, Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu, through his book "Right Mindfulness" as well as a few of his talks, presents bare attention as a component of mindfulness but not as the entirety of it. Rather, one should combine effort and discernment to practice Right Mindfulness, acting as a "gatekeeper" (using the simile of the gatekeeper found in the suttas), identifying and setting aside unskillful mental qualities while allowing skillful ones. In this way, mindfulness can be thought of as a combination of appropriate attention, right effort, and memory (so as to recall what one has learned about the dhamma). I've sometimes wondered just how different this view is from the way it is sometimes presented as bare attention - "without analyzing or fixating on it", as you say. If my understanding is correct, the bare-attention approach works because as you allow whatever comes up to pass away, eventually the hindrances should leave you alone at some point - or, by not fixating on things, you gain insight into its fundamental nature. But I've also heard the argument that if you don't analyze your thoughts/intentions/actions as skillful or unskillful, you might never learn to abandon them, or even know what to abandon. In addition, you might want to identify wholesome thoughts and qualities, as these could lead you to more pleasant and tranquil states (such as the jhanas) that could make it easier to obtain insight. I'm just curious as to what practitioners in the thread think about this.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Jacobeus posted:What I've discovered recently is that there is a bit of an ongoing debate about mindfulness and what exactly it means - i.e., does it refer to "bare attention", or to something more than that? More than a few teachers have described mindfulness as the act of giving your body, mind, feelings, and mental phenomena your full attention without judgement or getting involved. However, Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu, through his book "Right Mindfulness" as well as a few of his talks, presents bare attention as a component of mindfulness but not as the entirety of it. Rather, one should combine effort and discernment to practice Right Mindfulness, acting as a "gatekeeper" (using the simile of the gatekeeper found in the suttas), identifying and setting aside unskillful mental qualities while allowing skillful ones. In this way, mindfulness can be thought of as a combination of appropriate attention, right effort, and memory (so as to recall what one has learned about the dhamma). The idea of mindfulness having a more varied meaning than just bare-attention has been talked about a bit elsewhere and has some interesting possibilities. If you really want to dig in on this topic there is an interesting exchange between Bhikkhu Bodhi and B. Alan Wallace about the subject of sati in the suttas here. I don't have a lot of time to get into my own thoughts right now but I will try later. I'm not very well versed in the technicalities of various meditation schools but I think criticism of the vipassana-only emphasis is valid and the emphasis on the jhanas in the suttas should be given much more attention than they currently receive among practicioners, especially in lay meditation groups I have had contact with.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
Jacobeus posted:What I've discovered recently is that there is a bit of an ongoing debate about mindfulness and what exactly it means - i.e., does it refer to "bare attention", or to something more than that? More than a few teachers have described mindfulness as the act of giving your body, mind, feelings, and mental phenomena your full attention without judgement or getting involved. However, Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu, through his book "Right Mindfulness" as well as a few of his talks, presents bare attention as a component of mindfulness but not as the entirety of it. Rather, one should combine effort and discernment to practice Right Mindfulness, acting as a "gatekeeper" (using the simile of the gatekeeper found in the suttas), identifying and setting aside unskillful mental qualities while allowing skillful ones. In this way, mindfulness can be thought of as a combination of appropriate attention, right effort, and memory (so as to recall what one has learned about the dhamma). Can't say I'm qualified to speak at length on this topic, but I think the word mindfulness really heavily depends on the context. If you're practicing shamatha-vipashyana as elucidated in the Sattipatthana Sutta, Dzogchen zhine, or the mindfulness that John Kabat-Zinn likes to talk about, the views are very different. In regards to your second question, from the Vajrayana perspective, one would at first start with learning what qualities to accept and what qualities to reject (Hinayana), then noticing all those qualities are of the nature of emptiness (Mahayana) then moving on to bare attention, where all qualities are manifestations of buddhanature (Vajrayana/Dzogchen/Shikantaza[?]). So really at first you have to build the raft of positive qualities and know that you need to discard greed, aggression, and ignorance, but then eventually the goal is to let go of all reference points, so attaching even to positive qualities becomes a hindrance of its own. But this aspect doesn't come into play until you're farther along in the path. I think the best approach is to understand which type of meditation you're engaging in, understand the view, and eventually you'll come to a more intuitive understanding of mindfulness. From a Tibetan perspective, what Thanissaro Bhikkhu is talking about is both mindfulness and awareness (trenpa and seshin, respectively). Mindfulness being that bare attention, and awareness being almost that "environment" in which the attention is taking place. In a sense, that aspect of memory, effort, and discernment is awareness, the backdrop against which mindfulness takes place. Both of those are key ingredients for a successful practice, but again the awareness is informed by the view, which differs depending on where you are on your path of choice.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Mindfulness is kind of like the Tao. If you can define it you aren't seeing the real one. Far as I know, anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
There is also a problem of mindfulness not only meaning different things in different contexts (the "mindfulness" of calm abiding is more like watchfulness, or alertly attending to the stimulus, but later as shamatha develops into mahamudra it begins to resemble passive observation of the mind itself), but also that many different words, phrases, and concepts are rendered into English as "mindfulness" despite meaning other things. This is one of those cases where it is important to have a teacher. Mindfulness is not the be all and end all of meditation, and one can be mindful in many ways. With a teacher, one can clarify based on contexts and so on, whereas simply reading from a book, one may not get all the nuance. On an unrelated note, I want to shout out one of our own in this thread for his basically formal entry into the Nyingmapa tradition as he's gone into a closed retreat for a week for some pretty intense teachings. Edit: I guess I should also while I'm making announcements say that I'm pretty excited that I'll be doing University of Virginia's Tibetan Language Institute this summer for 8 weeks, followed by beginning some translation projects with my teacher, before I travel next year to India for teachings and also maybe to do Songtsen Library's translator training program. Paramemetic fucked around with this message at 23:22 on May 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
^wow, thats fantastic. I've been meaning to ask you if you ever began learning Tibetan. That all sounds like quite an educational adventure
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
The Dark Wind posted:Can't say I'm qualified to speak at length on this topic, but I think the word mindfulness really heavily depends on the context. If you're practicing shamatha-vipashyana as elucidated in the Sattipatthana Sutta, Dzogchen zhine, or the mindfulness that John Kabat-Zinn likes to talk about, the views are very different. In regards to your second question, from the Vajrayana perspective, one would at first start with learning what qualities to accept and what qualities to reject (Hinayana), then noticing all those qualities are of the nature of emptiness (Mahayana) then moving on to bare attention, where all qualities are manifestations of buddhanature (Vajrayana/Dzogchen/Shikantaza[?]). So really at first you have to build the raft of positive qualities and know that you need to discard greed, aggression, and ignorance, but then eventually the goal is to let go of all reference points, so attaching even to positive qualities becomes a hindrance of its own. But this aspect doesn't come into play until you're farther along in the path. I think the best approach is to understand which type of meditation you're engaging in, understand the view, and eventually you'll come to a more intuitive understanding of mindfulness. Just putting that out there :-)
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
Rhymenoceros posted:If you look up hina from hinayana in a pali or sanskrit dictionary, hina also means 'low; inferior; base; despicable' (pali) or insufficient, base or even vile in sanskrit. So there's a good case for that being a derogatory term. What would you propose as a designation for the "earliest teachings of the Buddha as elucidated in the Pali Canon", while still maintaining clarity that one is talking from a certain perspective? I feel like most people aren't familiar with the word Shravakayana, and saying "earliest teachings of the Buddha as elucidated in the Pali Canon" is a little on the wordy end and misses the fact that this term is implying certain extra meaning in regards to the topology of the teachings. I also feel that Theravada is an inaccurate term in this case, since generally when one is talking about the Hinayana, we're not including the centuries of Theravadan scholar exegesis that also exists. I understand that historically it's considered a derogatory term, but at the same time I've never encountered a single person who's used it in a derogatory fashion or was offended by that word, and it seems that it being a derogatory term is largely a historical issue between bickering and elitist schools. The way I see it, the word Hinayana is still in use in scholarly settings primarily because it is a very straightforward and helpful designation, and any teacher worth their salt would have nothing short of tremendous reverence for the power of those teachings. I generally try to avoid the term when I can because of its negative implications to some, but I do feel at the same time that sometimes it's helpful when explaining how the view might change once we begin to talk about emptiness. If you have any suggestions for alternative words that capture the same meaning, I'd be grateful to hear it! Best I have so far is "the first turning of the wheel of dharma."
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
The Dark Wind posted:What would you propose as a designation for the "earliest teachings of the Buddha as elucidated in the Pali Canon", while still maintaining clarity that one is talking from a certain perspective? I feel like most people aren't familiar with the word Shravakayana, and saying "earliest teachings of the Buddha as elucidated in the Pali Canon" is a little on the wordy end and misses the fact that this term is implying certain extra meaning in regards to the topology of the teachings. I also feel that Theravada is an inaccurate term in this case, since generally when one is talking about the Hinayana, we're not including the centuries of Theravadan scholar exegesis that also exists. I understand that historically it's considered a derogatory term, but at the same time I've never encountered a single person who's used it in a derogatory fashion or was offended by that word, and it seems that it being a derogatory term is largely a historical issue between bickering and elitist schools. The way I see it, the word Hinayana is still in use in scholarly settings primarily because it is a very straightforward and helpful designation, and any teacher worth their salt would have nothing short of tremendous reverence for the power of those teachings. I generally try to avoid the term when I can because of its negative implications to some, but I do feel at the same time that sometimes it's helpful when explaining how the view might change once we begin to talk about emptiness. If you have any suggestions for alternative words that capture the same meaning, I'd be grateful to hear it! Best I have so far is "the first turning of the wheel of dharma." Edit: There are other EBTs, like the Chinese Agamas, or early Tibetan texts. The cool thing is that when we compare EBTs in different languages, they are very similar in content, pointing to a common heritage. I agree that Hinayana generally isn't meant as derogatory in modern use, but once you look up the pali/sanskrit, it becomes pretty hard to not think of it that way. From what I understand so far, for example in the Buddha's first discourse, setting in motion the wheel of the Dhamma, hina (hīno in the sutta) is used to describe the path that is devoted to sensual pleasures, i.e. a wrong path. Isn't it a bit weird to use 'hina' as a term for early Buddhism, when the Buddha uses 'hina' to describe a wrong path? Rhymenoceros fucked around with this message at 10:58 on May 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 10:48
|
|
|
I'm gonna take up for the "Hinayana" term here and be the controversial kinda guy in that regard, I hope that this is understood as my hope for intellectual and scholarly clarity, and not that I'm a big jerk who gets off on using disparaging terms. Firstly, I will point out that the Hinayana is essential for Buddhism. Without the Hinayana, without the Four Noble Truths and a proper understanding of renunciation and liberation, and what we need liberated from, exactly, nothing else works. You cannot have Vajrayana without the Hinayana. You cannot have Mahayana without the Hinayana. The Hinayana is a foundation upon which both of those build, and to neglect the Hinayana or disparage it is folly. Not only folly, but in fact, disparagement of the Hinayana is a root downfall of a Bodhisattva. That said, the term was not taken by accident. It is specifically a contrast from the Mahayana, and the term developed from the Mahayana. From the Mahayana perspective, the Hinayana does not produce full Buddhahood. The Hinayana, which refers specifically to the Shravakayana (lit. "hearer's vehicle"), produces Arhats, not Buddhas. These Arhats have realization and liberation without full realization of emptiness, and so, according to the Mahayana, they become encapsulated consciousnesses until they are roused by Buddha Amitabha and become Bodhisattvas. It is therefore considered an inferior vehicle because it does not embrace Bodhicitta. Hinayana therefore became a term essentially within Mahayana texts to avoid the negative connotations of "Shravakayana" as the Shravakayana had taken on a kind of negative or bad meaning since the Mahayana teaches that it is essentially deficient and does not arrive at Buddhahood. That said, it is a perfect and excellent path as the Buddha taught it, and it is not inferior in the sense that it is inadequate, vile, or any such thing. It is, again, the very heart, the very basis of all other Buddha's teachings. To disparage it or disregard it as inferior or base or defiled or something is extremely wrong view. But within the discourse of the Mahayana, it is an accurate term. It is the "inferior" to the Mahayana's "greater." One uses the Hinayana to get to the Mahayana. In Gong Chig, Dharma Lord Jigten Sumgon teaches that "the most excellent view is possession of realization." Khenpo, in his commentary on this text, explains that this follows along a pervading theme of development in Gong Chig, specifically, that what is profound to you or I may be different dependent on level of attainment or study or so on, but whatever your current practice, based on your current realization, is the highest and most profound view. If you are at the level of the Hinayana practitioner where the Four Noble Truths is the primary focus of your mind training and spiritual development, then that is the highest and most profound form of Buddhism. If that is your most profound, then none of the Mahayana will be meaningful. Without realization of the Four Noble Truths, there can be no Mahayana path. These components must build atop one another. When you have fully achieved realization of the Four Noble Truths, then you will have new profound things, but we cannot ever neglect or relegate the Four Noble Truths to being inferior or "base." But that is the term that is used, historically, mainly because the Mahayana has developed the current narrative. The Theravadins prefer not to be referred to as the Hinayana but Hinayana does not refer to the Theravadans, it refers to the first turning of the wheel, the teachings on the Four Noble Truths, and the teachings of the path of renunciation, or the Vinaya, which does not include bodhicitta and Tathagatagarbha. Putting it on a euphemism treadmill would make sense if Hinayana referred to a class of people or group of people who were being disparaged, but there is no disparagement in this. It is foundational, core, essential Buddhism, it is a teaching of the Buddha, and so it is holy and precious Dharma. Furthermore, the euphemism treadmill can be a temporarily useful thing for social relations, but it is actually very problematic in scholarship, as it makes it much more difficult to understand earlier writings after we've rejected certain labels. If for example we stop using the word Hinayana to refer to what it does, then all of the past scholars who have used that term to refer to what it does presently refer to for the past 1500+ years would become incomprehensible without having to teach that meaning for a word anyhow. There is no reason to change a Sanskrit word with a meaning contemporary to Sanskrit because the Sanskrit word upon which it was based is interpreted as derogatory by non-Sanskrit speakers thousands of years after the word was coined. If you're not a Sanskrit speaker, it makes little sense to be trying to correct people for using terms found in texts literally written in Sanskrit. In Tibetan, it is either called theg chung (lit. "small vehicle") or theg dman (lit. "limited vehicle") because it is limited and less complete, but it is also fully regarded as extremely important, and is not used in a derogatory way. Hinayana is a loan word to English that is exactly the word used in Sanskrit writing from the time of the Mahayana. It's not a new English convention, so correcting it based on perceived bias or whatnot is very historically misleading, complicates scholarship, and generally defies or undermines convention unnecessarily. I understand that some practitioners of the Hinayana may not like the term, but they also need not use the term, because for them, there is nothing else needing a name, it's just the Buddhadharma. There are also vanishingly few Hinayana practitioners based on its historical meaning, so there's that. It just seems so strange to me that English speakers are trying to correct a word that was developed specifically as a contrast to Mahayana in the 1st or 2nd century and has been used a scholarly convention with a defined meaning for around 2000 years because of our obsession with politically correct speech. All that said, the other conventional term that would be used would be "Shravakayana." This term is more or less used in a derogatory way throughout Mahayana texts, because Hinayana has a context of being an aspect or smaller part of the Mahayana, whereas the Shravakayana is seen as a thing to be avoided by Mahayana practitioners. The Shravakayana refers to the "hearer's path," and many Mahayana aspiration prayers specifically pray "may I not be reborn as a shravaka or pratyakabuddha." It's a thing to be avoided. But it is what "Hinayana" refers to, specifically, so if you're looking for an alternative term, "Shravakayana" would be the way to go, if you want to be seen as having a very negative attitude towards it by scholars. Paramemetic fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jan 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Rhymenoceros posted:I would just call it 'early Buddhism', and refer to the Pali Canon as EBTs; 'early Buddhist texts'. To my understanding, early Buddhism and the EBTs are a common heritage of all the current schools. There are no "early Buddhist texts" from Tibet, the development of Buddhism in Tibet took place around 760 AD, Mahayana was an established thing. The term used in Tibetan for the corpus comprising the Shravakayana or early Buddhist teachings is what I mentioned in the post above, theg chung or theg dman, either small or limited vehicle. quote:I agree that Hinayana generally isn't meant as derogatory in modern use, but once you look up the pali/sanskrit, it becomes pretty hard to not think of it that way. From what I understand so far, for example in the Buddha's first discourse, setting in motion the wheel of the Dhamma, hina (hīno in the sutta) is used to describe the path that is devoted to sensual pleasures, i.e. a wrong path. What's most amusing to me is that we're trying to correct a term for being disparaging that was essentially developed to contrast two different and valid approaches in scholarly language while avoiding using a term that had taken on a kind of raw or negative flavor by referring to it as the "hearer's vehicle" since within the Mahayana that was considered a path that did not lead to perfect Buddhahood, whereas the Hinayana as a limited vehicle that does eventually lead one to the Mahayana is not so negative a term, but rather just a contrasting term, "small" vs. "great." One is a small track leading to a small attainment (liberation) while the other is a great track that leads to a great attainment (perfect Buddhahood). That a word translates many ways and can also carry a negative connotation does not mean it's correct to use that translation. This is one of the issues facing translators in many languages, where one word can have a plethora of meanings or implications but only one is "correct." Also, my understanding, which may be flawed, is that the historical Buddha did not ever teach in Sanskrit, but rather in Prakrit/Pali, as an intentional snub to the caste establishment which would have expected religious teachings to be done in Sanskrit, as well as to make the teachings available to the common people. If that's the case, I find it doubtful he'd have historically used the term hina itself as a Sanskrit term. If I'm mistaken, I hope someone more knowledgeable corrects me please. Paramemetic fucked around with this message at 23:45 on May 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2015 23:31
|
|
|
I have always read that the historical Buddha did not teach in Pali as a snub, and also that Pali was not a unified language that the Buddha actually spoke, but rather that Pali happened to be some kind of synthesis of regional dialicts the Buddha may have spoke and/or understood, as his teachings were localized and regional to where he happened to be living. I don't think Pali was ever an actual spoken native language, but I could be wrong. It is the liturgical language of Theravada Buddhism, but in the form it is currently used (in terms of the Canon), I don't think it was spoken in that native sense. However, the Pali texts represent the earliest known forms of what the historical Buddha taught, as far as we know at this point.
People Stew fucked around with this message at 00:11 on May 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
Edit 2: On second thought, I regret bringing up this point; seems like it can only create division and that's not worth it. We should all respect each other.
Rhymenoceros fucked around with this message at 20:19 on May 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2015 11:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
I know I could probably just google it, but could you tell me more about the Bohisattava vows? I know the basics, but someone who has taken them could better inform me. What pre-requisites, other than having taken refuge, are recommended? I took refuge back in November, and I keep daily practice, but rarely make it to the center. Yesterday I get an email inviting me to attend a Bodhisshitava pilgrimage weekend at KTD in New York with Khenpo Karthar Rinpoche. I would be honored to go, but I feel like might be a fish out of water if I went. Anyone tell me more about what the weekend would be like?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2015 21:31
|
|