Mahayana does not prohibit anyone from attaining enlightenment. I would rather say the core practice in Mahayana is loving kindness and compassion - and out of compassion one refrains oneself from entering into nirvana, and returns to help others attain liberation.
As a Theravada Buddism trying to research the Mahayana, it always confuses me where you guys get this idea from. Are you sure you are talking about Theravada? A serial killer was able to reach nirvana after Buddha warned and lectured him. I don't quite understand the misconception of Theravada "prohibiting attaining enlightenment". If someone claiming to be Theravada rejects someone from "attaining enlightenment", they aren't Theravada cause that's not how it works, you can't "prohibit" that. As long as you haven't committed the sin of harming buddha (who is no longer with us), harming a monk, killing your parents and breaking up the monks, you can attain enlightenment. Monk, men, women, and children, anyone can attaining enlightenment so long as they follow buddha's teaching.
The speaker speaks of his “feelings”, and an astonishing simplification and generalization on a vast topic that carries a divisive tone. If the speaker has studied and practiced both traditions in-depth, I would listen and think about his views. There are in-depth lectures available for those truly interested in understanding instead of drawing lines. For an ordinary householder, I would stick to studying the Buddha’s words and practice practice practice rather than paying attention to such divisive generalizations.
@@Jonathan-jp4zz Modern Theravada tradition derives from the Taamrashaatiya school of Buddhism of Sri Lanka, which arose in the late middle ages. Theravadins cannot claim their school to be pure because their roots originate from Non-Magadhic roots.
Someone who follows Theravada is going to think a person who follows Mahayana is wrong. The converse is also true. If they didn't think the other side was wrong, they would folllow it. An outsider could give a more objective description of the differences between the two branches. If you thank a Mahayana would give a better description, you are mistaken, their very name for Theravada, Hinayana is meant ad an insult. What I would say is the issue between the last stage of the Path, whether bodhisattva or enlightenment applies to .01% of Buddhist or less. Better to focus on the parts of the Path that affects most. This is a discussion only relevant for a small number of monastics.
it seems there is a silent war going on between theraveda practitioner and mahayana practitioner. even after 12 years in the robes.. i wish we could have a serious discussion and come to peace because i think there is just misunderstanding between each other..
I was a Catholic Monk for 10 years, and it turned me into a Buddhist. I found Theravada to be the "easiest" for me to adapt to. Like in Christianity, Buddhism has a paradox; Does your faith prove your works of love and kindness or do your works of love and kindness prove that you are practicing a faith? In other words, am I caring for others because of who I already am, or is it because of who or what I am trying to be? I feel like it's probably a little bit of both, but practice must be engaged in the community (Sangha) in order for it to bare any fruit.
being a christian monk made you a theravada buddhist? This is interesting. I wonder how that happens? Was it based on theology/teaching or some personal experience like insight of the nature of reality?
It was because I came to the conclusion, through several years of intense study, that anything dogmatic was a made up fallacy and that the social gospel and the love of our community is all there really is. I wanted to engage in that, so I left the Abbey and became a social worker.
@@tatemorgan5576 Hmm, but Buddhism teaches us that there are 80,000 dharmma gates/doors and each sect is but one. All religions have paths to enlightenment. Did you ever become acquainted with Catholic meditation methods? Or sects that are actually devoted to the path? Carmelites, Discalced Carmelites, Camaldolese, Carthusians, etc? Lectio Divina? Stuff from St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, Bernadette Roberts, etc? Buddhism is great too but there was already a path available. Jesus teaches noself and non-duality is an experience that is discussed in all religions.
I don't have any buddhist community near me unfortunately. I am really interested in Theravada buddhism. Do I really need a community to learn the teachings? Will I not be able to get to nirvana just by following the teachings by myself ?
another difference could it be that many mahayana schools are hibridized with non buddhist beliefs and practices, with some supersticious and idolatric rituals that do not relate to Buddha's original teachings? I am interested in becoming a Buddhist but was a bit put off to see in some temples a lot of weird images of gods and goddesses, and practicioners getting their samadhi dispersed by what seemed to me nonsensical prayers to imaginary beings, and also idolatric devotion to living masters... Is it not a basic tenet of Buddha"s thought to strive to get rid off all delusion? to experience by oneself the real nature of things instead of blindly believing a master"s words? For this reason I feel Theravada buddhism to be more minimalist, sober and faithful to Buddha' s teachings... but lately I have been reading about the unfair treatment some Theravadan schools dispense to Bikkhunis, their refusal to grant them full ordination as nuns... and was very bewildered by the very contradiction of this attitude with a true compassionate Buddhist heart..Thanks for your videos
Hey! A Sri Lankan Buddhist here! The truth is that it's the same with Theravada, and there is a reason for that. One of the main reasons why Buddhism successfully spread out to such an extent out of India is that it would reinterpret local beliefs and absorb them into Buddhist practice in a way that it wouldn't contradict the Dhamma or Vinaya. Thus, local customs, traditions and objects of veneration would be absorbed into the Buddhist tradition of particular regions. This is universal with Buddhism everywhere, even today. For example, in the West, Theravada practices related to faith ( Sraddha ) and merit accumulation are downplayed in favor of meditation and "enlightenment now", while in Sri Lanka, practices related to Sraddha and merit accumulation take a very significant role. In fact, Sraddha is considered to be a very quick way to enter into the stages of enlightenment. Mahayana, while it does put more emphasis on faith and worship over Theravada, is much more intellectually rigorous and philosophical than Theravada in my opinion. Bhante here, I'm afraid to say, has taken Mahayana ideas out of context and simplified them to such a degree that it misses the point and is just way off. This is a really common thing with Theravada monks and scholars. It should also be noted that sectarianism is rife in Buddhism as it is in any other world religion. And a fact that many ignore is that historically, early Theravada was influenced by Mahayana too. Mahayana and Theravada are much more recent distinctions in the history of Buddhism than most people think. I suggest you explore both schools in more depth.
I agree. It would be nice to dispute metaphysics without worrying about unclean spirits TIBET cough, cough. #shudder You might find Eastern Orthodox Christianity appealing (despite the proliferation of misguided fundamentalists on the internet). We have a homegrown tradition of meditative prayer with historic crossover to Sufism.
Bhikkhus, before my enlightenment, while I was still a bodhisatta, not yet fully enlightened, it occurred to me: “What now is feeling? What is the origin of feeling? What is the way leading to the origination of feeling? What is the cessation of feeling? What is the way leading to the cessation of feeling? What is the gratification in feeling? What is the danger? What is the escape?”
I'd put it this way... Theravada is the way as taught by the Buddha to achieve nibbana in this very life, through full dedication to one own cultivation, as the Lord Buddha did, and originally intended. But this way would be too difficult for many, and would prevented many from entering the stream. Thus Mahayana is a way to plant seeds of Buddhism as it allows Buddhism to be practiced in a way adaptable to local customs. Such as worshipping using mantras (which are basically hymns and praises in Sanskrit), seeking bodhisattas (which can manifest as gods or humans) to pave a starting path for the common folk. The divergence started when the teachings were overly expounded to make it simple for the common folk (albeit may make things more complicated - such as the strict vegetarian diet, which Buddha did not force unto the monks)... However, if we look into the soul of its teachings, it is still essentially Buddhism. A Buddhist is basically a person who takes refuge in the Triple Gems. Both roads point to the same goal...
@@desmondw1987 dont just believe what i said. FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF. investigate. go to chatgpt, and ask your deepest, toughest, questions about theravada vs mahayana. its a literal machine thats filled with ALL the knowledge available on the whole vast internet. or, you can rely on the words of some random dumbass whom goes around name-calling others, just because his/er chosen delusion/ brainwashing was put under scrutiny.
I think the main problem and source of contention here is a difference in definition of what true enlightenment is. On the one hand, the Theravadin and shravakayana view is that enlightenment is the attainment of arahatship in nirvana. On the other hand, the bodhisattvayana contends that this is not final enlightenment and that true enlightenment is buddhahood which is obtained after the 10th bhumi on the boddhisattva path. In my opinion, its just a difference in view but the goal and the end result are exactly the same. The whole idea of arguing one side as better than the other is not really a productive discussion. Let the Theravadin have their view and the Bodhisattva a different view. Same mountain, different road.
Spot on talk from monk Sarana. I think studying history shows how humans can really alter things, even in quite contrast to the historical Buddhas teachings. But all tradions are still rich and helpful. I spent 4 years attending a Tibtean centre. Changed my life for the better. Now following Ahjan Sonas teachings. Thervada.
Which is where it is interesting to find out about the meeting between the Dalai Lama and Goenka, after which the Dalai Lama sent his higher disciples to take a Vipassana retreat, ( asked to temporarily forget about their rites and rituals ) with good results :)
If one would like a more nuanced and learned exposition of this topic without the hasty generalizations I recommend a talk by a Theravadin monk with many years of experience in both streams of Buddhism - Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi. The talk is titled Bridging the Two Vehicles and can be found on UA-cam.
From the explanation of bodhisatta in Spk it appears that the Pāli commentarial tradition recognizes alternative etymologies of the word, as equivalent either to Skt bodhisattva (“an enlightenment being”) or to *bodhisakta (“one devoted to enlightenment”)
Dear Ven. I would like to use your Video in my channel as well because I want share this knowledge to Cambodian who can understand English and I hope you don't mind Thanks Sarana
Theravadins and before them the proto-Theravadin schools suffered thousands of years of discrimination by self-proclaimed Mahayanists many of whom were viewed as writing their own sutras and creating new Buddhas outside of the Pali cannon as if these sutras had been spoken by the Buddha. Just today I sat in a session delivered by a Vajrayana monk who referred to Theravada as Hinayana yet again - the discarded, inferior vehicle. This mindset has soured relations for millennia and persists. We need to move away from this language and focus on our core doctrines that bind us. There is the “Way of the Elders”, the “Great Vehicle” and the “Diamond Way”. Whichever school you choose, be happy in that and never disparage others.
Anatta is a central doctrine of Buddhism. It marks one of the major differences between Theravada Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism. According to the anatta doctrine of Original Buddhism, at the core of all human beings and living creatures, there is no "eternal, essential and absolute something called a soul, self or atman".Buddhism, from its earliest days, has denied the existence of the "self, soul" in its core philosophical and ontological texts. In its soteriological themes, Buddhism has defined nirvana as that blissful state when a person, amongst other things, realizes that he or she has "no self, no soul".
@@tsurugi5 true although in Mahayana we have the 3 bodies, the Dharmakaya (Ultimate Reality) , the Sambhogakaya (Reward Body), the Nirmanakaya (Physical Body)
Namo Buddhaya Bhante. Is that any way we may spot an enlightened person (since it is mentioned in the video that an enlightened person can be reborn) while this person still at young age? Or it'll take an enlightened person to recognize another enlightened person?
It's almost impossible to tell one is enlightened. Maybe easy to tell one is NOT. Based on Suttas, enlightened Sotapannas don't usually take human birth. There was none in Suttas. It is impossible to know if the newborn baby is reborn Ariya. (Sotapanna or Sakadagami) Reincarnation stories are fake news from Tibet.
only an arahant will be able to recognize another arahant. and even so, an arahant one self may be able to conceal/ hide the fact that he's an arahant, when its necessary/ suitable. we lay people, unattained, with no abhinna developed, have next to zero chances of ascertaining.
now i feel conned. i didnt know what i was doing, was at the lowest point of my life, contemplating s00icide every other hour, finally threw myself into buddhism (i loved zen), attended this meetup/ gathering, and before i knew it, it was the part where we were taking the Mahayana vows and all that. which i took! and then, a few years later down the road, after REALLY reading the Lotus Sutra, and finding out that the Mahayana has been calling names and insulting Theravada, and through a WHOLE BUNCH of really intense research, i realized there is SOMETHING REALLY WRONG with Mahayana (and Vajrayana). so, now im ALL-IN on theravada, because back then, i was completely ignorant and hadnt done enough research and study! will this make me an Oathbreaker?!? whats gonna happen to my kamma??? SIIIIGH.
“In the past, it is said, after having fulfilled the pāramīs over eight inconceivable periods and 100,000 eons, the bodhisatta Kassapa was reborn in the womb of a brahmin woman named Dhanavatī, wife of the brahmin Brahmadatta. That same day his chief disciple also passed away from the deva world and was reborn in the womb of the wife of the brahmin who served as assistant chaplain. Thus the two were conceived on the same day and emerged from the womb on the same day, and on the same day [281] their elders gave the name Kassapa to one and the name Tissa to the other.” Excerpt From The Suttanipata
i listened half way i i couldnt listen any further. sorry monk sarana, i am exposed by mahayana first, and my understanding is nothing like what you explained. seems to me you yourself have a very big misunderstanding on mahayana. e.g. one very good example is your misunderstanding on the vow. mahayana dont teach us to vow not to attain buddhahood until every other one does. that vow is ksitigabhar bodhisatvas' vow. Is HIS vow. he didnt ask us all to vows the same. mahayana never once said we cannot atain buddhahood in this life. everyone can attain buddhahood in this life as long as he practice the buddha's way. Similarly, as an mahayana exposed student, i did not disagree with theravadas teaching like what you claiming. instead i agrees it all! and in fact, i'm practicing it! meditation, observation, being neutral.. (only those i can afford to practise now)
It's definitely not true that Theravada rejects women having a place as monastics. The original Bhikkhuni lineage died in Sri Lanka some centuries ago. However, there have been several modern efforts to reinstate it. The situation is just complex. Some sects have made an attempt to revive the Bhikkhuni order, most notably in Sri Lanka. There's thousands of Bhikkhunis in Sri Lanka. Their ordinations were done with the help of Korean Bhikkhunis who could trace their lineage back to the Buddha. In Thailand and Myanmar, fully ordained Bhikkhunis are not recognized by the state, but women often live similar to Samaneri (novices), taking 10 precepts.
@@saintsword23 That's a rather simplification of the discrimination against women to be ordeined. The responsables of that ban in those three countrys are not the goverments, but the group of patriarch theravadin leaders in those countrys who rejects the Dharmaguptaka ordenation in Taiwan. That's why new formal ordenation was held in Australia far from the hard establishment of theravadines on those three countrys.
@@Buddhist_Philosopher You literally claimed that Theravada does not have a place for female monastics...and are now accusing me of oversimplifying the situation? Pot, meet kettle. The situation is complex, but saying that there's no nun's order in Theravada is just not the case. There's about 1500 nuns in Sri Lanka, but ya, Ajahn Brahm has tried to get it going in Australia as well. He's been expelled by the Thai Forest tradition for doing it and was asked to vacate his monastery back in 2009 as a consequence. Further, there are female novices (10 precept renunciates) even in places that don't have a full Bhikkhuni order. So even without the full Bhikkhuni sangha there's still a place for female renunciates. It's controversial in the Theravada world, for absolutely sure, but saying it's just not a thing is the oversimplification.
He was just stating some uncomfortable facts about Mahayana. Even the Buddha prophesized that the Dhamma will gradually disappear through distortions and convenient interpretations of the Dhamma. That's why in some Mahayana schools you will find monks who are still married totally goes against Buddha's teachings.
There's a history about how the split came to be after the 2nd Buddhist Council, when Mahadeva posed five questions that led to the formation of the Mahasangika school, which eventually became Mahayana. The Mahasangika faction was actually the larger of the two, with the Sthaviravada being the school that gave rise to many schools, one of which would eventually be Theravada. The Mahasangika was comprised of many monks who were dissatisfied with the Vinaya (monk's code of conduct the Buddha set forth) while the Sthaviravada kept the old code. The five questions Mahadeva asked were, viewed in a modern light, rather silly and clearly were born of wrong view. Mahayana also added a lot of sutras they claim were spoken by the Buddha but clearly were later inventions. While I have a lot of respect for Zen in particular, and I think the Rinzai emphasis on koans is innovative and effective, knowing the history and being familiar with the Pali Canon and Mahayana scriptures both has led me to form the conclusion that Mahayana is clearly not what the Buddha taught, and the more devotional schools of Mahayana are so far removed from the Buddha's teaching that they should (lovingly! kindly!) be chastised for wrong view.
@vikingspirit It's closer, but still not exact. Ajahn Sujato, for instance, produced a list of discrepancies between modern Theravada practice and what is in the earliest Buddhist texts. Some examples include: (1) the earliest texts explain that consciousness of any sort is suffering but many Theravada sects believe that the mind continues on after Arahantship, (2) dry insight like the Goenka school is just not a thing in the early texts, and (3) there were no restrictions on teaching laypeople the deepest meditative techniques in the early suttas. His list is more extensive but those are some examples.
@@saintsword23 It seems to me that your conclusion is wrong, because you believe that the only validity of a text is the date of its composition. *And the content of the Doctrine??* The only thing that the dating of texts shows, is that the basic doctrinal current of the Mahayana was already present long before the Mahayana was formed, and belongs to a common root with the original Sthaviravadins.
@@Buddhist_Philosopher "It seems to me that your conclusion is wrong, because you believe that the only validity of a text is the date of its composition." The date of a text is a necessary part of its authenticity, but not sufficient. For example: there's many texts written during the Buddha's time, but are rejected as authentic because the doctrines they assert directly contradict much more widely accepted texts. So, just being an old text is not sufficient. However, it is necessary. There is an entire corpus of Mahayana literature written hundreds of years after the Buddha that claims to be the words of the Buddha, but the text first shows up hundreds of years later and is never referenced by any other text before the time it shows up. This makes it very likely the text is not authentically the words of the Buddha, but a later addition made by a Buddhist school. Since virtually all the Mahayana corpus (Heart Sutta, Diamond Sutta, etc) is like this, I reject the Mahayana as inauthentic. I mean, the Diamond Sutta reads like an early 2000s chain email, talking about how propagating it will give one all these wonderous benefits.
@@rafaelecattonar1506 the one that holds off nirvana. I rather not that's why I chose theravada. Zen teaches that one can achieve but aslo teaches to not achieve. That's why my school gets called selfish alot
@@Buddhist_Philosopher, Brahamanism influenced or developed Mahayana tradition with the help of Chandraguptha Maurya's invation of the Buddhist Magadha Kingdom with the help of Brahaman Chanakya. Therefore, we should know the difference between them.
@@smlanka4u The Tantras are esoteric transmissions in visions from the Buddhas to the Mahasiddhas of India. Although it has Hindu elements. We should know differences but maintining an open mind.
@@Buddhist_Philosopher, They have tried to recommend themselves by using the word Maha (Great) to mention the developers of the Mahayana tradition and Mahayana. It is an indication of their ego. And Brahaman's caste system depends on ego too. Also, some societies try to use tricks like that to make them superior than others. Ego divides people like that, and prevents seeing the truth clearly. The ultimate truths and their processes mentioned in Theravada Abhidhamma are very important to understand the nature of reality as it is, without depending on believes. Best of luck. Bye.
If there is No Self (Annata) and no hard substance but just process does this mean only the Karma is transferred during the rebirth from one Individual to the next? And does this mean a individual is reborn not only after death but also in the mid of lifetime. Or another question: are some of the 5 Skandhas much longer present then others (for example a spirit that could be transferred) from one individual to the next? And maybe a last question: Could Nirwana something like a world-soul that is - in the form of Buddha Nature (as long as it is not just a potential to become Buddha) - eternal and already us, as all humans, and finally reached when we have left Samsara?
Already found nirvana yet its not a huge boom like i expected its more a slow growing peace that makes things empty like ideas point of view etc and if deep enough in it i cant give one f if in pain its helping to keep me alive
Those awakened ones (sambuddhā). Spk: There are four kinds of awakened ones: omniscient Buddhas, paccekabuddhas, “four-truth awakened ones” (i.e., arahant disciples), and those awakened through learning. The first three types are indicated in the present context. They fare evenly amidst the uneven: they fare evenly amidst the uneven common domain of the world, or amidst the uneven community of sentient beings, or amidst the uneven multitude of defilements.
The seed the Buddha planted is alive, which is the core essence of Buddhism, and this separates it from every other mythology or religion. Why people get confused over both schools in my opinion is this -- The Buddha started of with teaching his inner circles with more sophisticated teachings and slowly expanded to teach the outer circle a less complex teachings. The latter teachings were first revealed, and the former came out much later after the death of Guatama Sadhata. Why i think Mahayana is closer to the Buddha's core teachings is this. The Buddha on his way to sick enlightenment, went through many challenges, the key one being his disciples abandoning him when he gave up practising arseticism. Upon enlightenment, he didn't just disappear and stopped manifesting. Rather, he came back to share his enlightenment with others and showed them the way. Mahayana practices just that, whereas Theravada doesn't really practice that. In Theravada, once you reach Nirvana, you stop manifesting in this world, which from a Mahayanist point of view is dualistic.
Nice teaching since i travel to thailand and i been a vajrayana follower because my country where i live doesnt have a theravada temple only chinese vajrayana(This school at least follows buddhas rules and it feels freewill) and nichiren mahayana. In Thailand i learn that theravada its better than mahayana but i like some mahayana chants and probably i could visited a mahayana temple in vietnam or other places but honestly i think your explanation its good about the subject and The thailand sangha its more balanced for my way of live. also the mahayanas most of the monks and the people follow a strict vegan diet and i think The buddha did not teach that. So i guess they lose some buddhas teachings or prefer to change it. i wonder if some indians who were vegan enter in the buddhist sangha and change some rules when the buddha passed away. It could be devadattas people ?
@@kaustubhnigam628 If someone donates the meat to a monk and declines the offering there's an EGO on that. You cant say ' I am a vegetarian or vegan" (that's an ego trap). So I would try to say that if somebody donates, you are willing and thankful to accept it. I hope it will help.
@@enlightenedperspectives1111 I know from where are you coming from Here , a dhammapada verse for you : All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill. 🙂
what if you are tricked into enlightenment? i know for example that in zen, you are given a riddle that causes your mind to shut down or self-implode, which leads to a spontaneous enlightenment. basically, mahayana budhists are susceptible to spiritual trolling.. just because something is doctirnally not possible, does not mean its not technically possible! otherwise, theere would be only 1 religion, but there are many... so there is one mountain top and many paths that lead to it.. not just theravada or mahayana.. just my 2 cents..
Ashin Sarana, in the practice of Dzogchen, we recognize that all paths are but skillful means to guide sentient beings to the direct experience of their own true nature-beyond words, beyond distinctions, beyond schools. Your assertion that Mahayana does not aim for enlightenment seems to be a cloud obscuring the sky. In the heart of Mahayana, and especially in practices like Dzogchen, enlightenment is not a distant goal but the immediate recognition of our intrinsic Buddha-nature. The Bodhisattva vow is not a chain but a boundless expression of compassion emanating from this realization.
k: Bodhi is knowledge; a being endowed with bodhi is a bodhisatta, a knowing one, a wise one, a sagely one. For from the time he forms his aspiration at the feet of former Buddhas, that being is always wise, never a blind fool. Or else, just as a mature lotus that has risen up above the water and is due to blossom when touched by the sun’s rays is called “an awakening lotus,” so a being who has obtained the prediction (to future Buddhahood) from the Buddhas and who will inevitably fulfil the perfections (pāramī) and attain enlightenment is called an awakening being (bujjhanasatta); he is a bodhisatta. One who lives yearning for enlightenment-the knowledge of the four paths-is devoted to, attached to, enlightenment (bodhiyaṃ satto āsatto); he is a bodhisatta.
I suppose the first question is what's the purpose of attaining nirvana. Is it solely to relieve one's personal suffering on their singular journey to enlightenment or is eternal nirvana only achieved when all pieces of the conscious collective have emancipated themselves back to the whole
I don't care what ever you call me. as far as i cannot realize nibbana still in circle of samsara i still in sadness, so named like theravada mahayana or etc useless for me, if i cannot free from circle of samsara.?i just do and practices to be free from circle of samsara .i believe.buddham saranam gachami.dhammam saranam gachami.sanggham saranam gachami. I believe.anicca.dukkha anatta.i belive karma and what buddha saying and teaching.i believe some day i will be free.
Frankly, I am speechless when I hear what this no-longer monk explains Mahayana, forbids one to attain Enlightment "in one life" and have to be "reborn" !! As he said monks of both schools lack understanding of the other school, is he the exception to this and excels other Theravada monks in this repect ? Buddhism is all encompassing and accomodates all externalities without losing or changing our Buddhahood "随緣不變，不變随緣‘’. Theravada is the building block of Mahayana, its very fundamental. Without studying Theravada, one cannot fully understood Mahayana and this is very much the sequence how Buddha taught.
self effort to achieve beyond heavens is very hard in this ending age hence we hav to rely on the Buddha power also to achieve it n most of the celestial beings are into Buddha name chanting method too to go higher up , the hint is in the Ksitigarbha Sutra. Theravada method is not suitable for Celestial beings to practice , for instance , the beings in Formless heaven aka without physical body ,only consciousness remains they mentally chant Buddha names to achieve Buddhas Pureland. read any Mahayana Sutra , a few chapters n then use your absorbed knowledge n ask yourself a question, isit possible for human minds capability to write those sutras ?
@@chamithathukorala1985 He did say how. However I did not wanted to spend a lot of time trying to re-explain here and come off like I am challenging this path. Nor did I feel I needed.
In Theravada this world of form is real and something to escape. In Mahayana this world of form is an illusion that must be seen as such. Its like the difference between escaping from a real prison cell, and pretending the walls aren't real...so what is the point of escape?
With all due respect Banti, but I have to say that you are giving wrong explanation of Theravada and Mahayana. You need to study more on Tripitaka or Buddha’s teaching. And commentary on Buddhist teachings. There is big difference between Samma -Sam Buddha and Arhats. To become a Buddha. It needs to accumulate countless of paramis and take a vow of bodhisattva. Over the subsequent aeons, the bodhisattva would renew his vow in the presence of each of the buddhas who came after Dipamkara, before becoming the buddha Shakyamuni himself. Over the course of his lifetimes as a bodhisattva, he accumulated merit (punya) through the practice of 6 (or 10) virtues. After his death as Prince Vessantara, he was born in the Tusita Heaven, whence he surveyed the world to locate the proper site of his final birth. - Thera means elder . Theravada is also known as doctrine of the elders. There were Bodhisattva practitioner in Theravada Buddhism. It’s all depends on motivation. I can’t explain everything there. All want to say that please preach right information to people. Because you’re wearing monk rope. Thank you
I didn't find anything in his explanation that is factually incorrect. He has an obvious bias toward Theravada, but he acknowledges this and perhaps it is for good reason. Mahayana monks must take the Boddhisatva vow, Theravada monks get a choice. The Buddha simply encouraged getting to enlightenment asap.
@@lewkirk821 it's a vinaya rule if someone is hugging his knees/standing/walking/ doing any other body posture not to teach them dharma as it seems he is not interested/respectful to the preaching.
Even a cursory reading of the Pali scriptures will show that Mahayana is (lovingly!) simply not what the Buddha taught. There's elements of what the Buddha taught in it of course, but they add a lot of stuff that is just incorrect. Bante gets at some of it in this video, but 11 minutes is not enough to cover such a vast topic of course! It's not simply a matter of different interpretation. The Mahayana scriptures, like the Diamond Sutra, are required for it to make sense, but these scriptures were later additions and clearly never spoken by the Buddha (their tone and approach is completely out of step with the rest of the Canon and no extent copies exist prior to centuries after the Buddha's paranibbana).
U r describing the minds and talks of laymen - people...pls talk to thosewho are well disciplined and practitioners in these subjects. Eg: about enlightenment- mahayana too tells that one can attain in this very lifetime.(however gautama himself had several lifetime before attaining buddha as described in his life story)...also misunderstanding or accusing of about not knowing the ultimate nature of mind on either school (theravada And Mahayana) of buddhism is an irony because it's the same buddha with variety of principle and practices laid out to different people with different temperament and capacities....but it's good to see your commitment and pls do practice diligently...knowledge will always vary depending many factors..may u attain enlightenment.
I didn't find anything in his explanation that is factually incorrect. He has an obvious bias toward Theravada, but he acknowledges this and perhaps it is for good reason. The two have some similarities but also some big differences.
In mahayana, even the buddha willing to be born again, to save other beings, like the samyakdharmavidya buddha, that incarnate become Avalokitesvara bodhisattva. I dont know the basis you can say that mahayana prohibits someone to be an anuttarasamyaksambuddha 😐
For an outsider what seems astonishing is that both these directions preach consistant meditation practice. So after countless hours of meditation practice for years after years which is supposed to bring deep insights etc. ---you have monks saying the other group does not get it. Pretty bleek outlook if you ask me. Makes me almost believe that many of those supposed insights are fabrications of individual minds, not some relative, let alone ultimate truth. BTW one interesting side note: Buddha himself never called his path "Buddhism". He actually called it "Brahmacharya" ---the path to the absolute. Those that drift closely towards nihilistic points of view should keep that in mind---Buddha designed a practice or way and named it: the path to the "absolute".
Mahayana Buddhist Sutras were found in the caves of Mahasangika and Sthavirada, which existed thousand years before Theravada came into existence. Mahayana believe that enlightenment is possible this life.
@@thekingminn Theravada started only la few hundred years after the Mahasangika and Sthavirada. The Mahasangika already had Mahayana Sutras hundreds of years before the Theravada sect was developed
@@thekingminnMahayana is divided into 3 phases: 1) Prajna Paramita (Wisdom) School, 2) Buddha-Nature or Consciousness only School, and 3) Mantrayana/Vajrayana. The Mantrayana/Vajrayana School is definitely taught not by the Buddha but by Padmasambava. Tibetan Buddhists acknowledge this. Mahayana sutras (e.g. Surangama sutra) that has long dharani or mantra sometimes contains the names of Hindu Deity such as Tara, Ganesha and even the names of various ghosts.
It's one of the monk's rules. Others in the same section of the vinaya include not teaching Dhamma on a moving vehicle or to someone holding a weapon. The reason why was a matter of etiquette. Back in the Buddha's day it was considered impolite to hug your knees. There's a lot of rules that those of us living in a different place at a different time may consider unnecessary or archaic, but the Theravadin monks still keep to the original rules laid down by the Buddha.
Bhante Sarana has many misunderstandings of Mahayana and should refrain from explaining it, thus spreading the misunderstanding even further. Those who want to know Mahayana should learn from the right teacher. The practice of Mahayana is perhaps not to the taste of everyone, but many have found it more inspiring and helpful.
I didn't find anything in his explanation that is factually incorrect. He has an obvious bias toward Theravada, but he acknowledges this and perhaps it is for good reason.
I have a Mahayana teacher, but my practice is mostly Theravada. I am confused and trying to understand. I found it very helpful. I didn't know a boddhisatva could be reborn due to his perfect compassion in contrast to the cessation of craving. I was always confused about this. You seem very insecure about Mahayana teachings, he didn't say anything incorrect, that's probably why you reffer to his as Hinayana. Are teachings only allowed to be in agreement with your views?
samsara=nirvana nirvana=samsara bodhi is extremeless bodhi cannot be entered and cannot be eschewed according to my Mahayana teachers, everything taught about Mahayana in this video is incorrect
@Pepeko Mahayana has so many brenchs that he is actually wrong. Most popular of Mahayana teachs dont even persue nirvana. They teach that you can obtain Buddha body in this life.
Mahayana,Vajrayana, Tantra Yana, Mantra yana Buddhism after 7th century AD Bramhan Converted into Hindu religion in India. Most Of Buddhist Mahayan,Vajrayana Boddhistava, Vihar Bramhan Converted Into Hindu Temple and Hindu God.
After the last Buddha reach enlightenment in this planet, there will be 100 quintillion’s planets more until humans and angels can witness another Buddha. That is insanely eon’s and eon’s, long long long time from this planet. That is why if we keep on practicing the Buddha religion some day in this planet we can obtain enlightenment and reach Nirvana. It’s not to late and don’t wishes for to much nonsense because it will alter your future life!
I did not hear anything factually incorrect in what he was saying. He clearly is biased toward Theravada, but he acknowledges this and perhaps it's with good reason.
@@nikolaskolonias3235 Do you have specific examples? Just saying it's wrong without examples reads like an emotional reaction rather than a reasoned examination.
@@saintsword23 nothing emotional lol I don’t know the monk- sorry to analyse such philosophical issues will take me almost a day writing. Have a good day
@@FromPlanetZX Where does it say this in the Tipitaka? I'm very familiar with the scriptures and I never recall reading this. Can you please find the location?
You are a Theravada monk. You should teach the Theravada and not disparage other forms of Buddhism. All forms of Buddhism will bring you to full enlightenment when practiced correctly.
@@saintsword23 You are thinking of the Bodhisattva vow. That is more in the Vajrayana than the Mahayana but nowhere is it obligatory. It is done out of compassion not obligation
I am going to assume that you are/were a practicing Zen Buddhist whose teacher told you that this was an obligation. I practiced another form of Mahayana Buddhism for well over a decade within an organization that never once mentioned such a vow. I have heard the Tibetan Buddhists mention it but never implied that it was mandatory. How long did you practice the Mahayana form? I would be very interested to know how to fact check this not to try to settle a dispute but to look into it and if I am wrong to readjust my thinking.
I wouldn't say this is the case. I came from an atheistic background but after much meditation and reflection I know the core teachings about liberation from suffering are essentially correct now. One can discard the more supernatural elements.
You hope for discussion. And then all you do is Theravada propaganda. I hoped for more compassion and comprehension of Buddhist fundamental unity. Very sorry 🙏🏼💕
My dear... yes you can be a great lawyer on the side of your Theravad case, BUT am afraid that here you seem to be trying to PLAY a fair impartial JUDGE !!? 😢
@@zhugeliangkongming479 Don't understand. I dont know Sanskrit. Can you please explain? Does Hinduism originated from Vedas or Shiva? Does Hinduism suggest human to take Nirvana or reincarnations again and again in order to obtain ultimate enlightenment?
@@boddhiworld714 Hinduism believing God. You can get relief from suffering by mukthi that's what you call nirvana. So you have to pray chant meditate do yoga to get mukthi.
this difference exists only in the beginning of the path. even an anagami would not see difference. by arhathood you are not "a being that is enlightened" in the common sense anymore
You speak of nothing concerning the Pure lands and the declining Dharma Age. Is there one person in this modern day that has become fully enlightened? The entire world would know of it. The Declining Dharma Age is the very reason for the Mahayana - or, more appropriately called, the Bodhisattvayana. No Dharma gate is better or worse, so no need to say Mahayana or Hiniyana. They both have value.
Don't tell lies.theravada Buddhist not believes hindu gods,Some may believe ,But theravada philosophy considers those gods to be mythical gods ,You must be thinking about India. At present, the correct Theravada Buddhism exists in Sri Lanka
The Buddha sometimes talked about the Hindu gods India believed in in his time (Indra and Mara in particular...Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva were not even a thing yet), but Buddhists do not "believe in" these gods.
Here is someone talking about Mahayana who very clearly does not understand Mahayana. Anyone who claims to understand ultimate truth (such as this unenlightened and extremely ignorant monk) is a fool. Nothing this monk says about either tradition should be trusted.
Mahayana does not prohibit anyone from attaining enlightenment. I would rather say the core practice in Mahayana is loving kindness and compassion - and out of compassion one refrains oneself from entering into nirvana, and returns to help others attain liberation.
why cant u go back with nivana?
nope. the karaniya-metta sutta is one of the CORE tenets of Theravada.
so what youre saying is misleading.
As a Theravada Buddism trying to research the Mahayana, it always confuses me where you guys get this idea from. Are you sure you are talking about Theravada? A serial killer was able to reach nirvana after Buddha warned and lectured him. I don't quite understand the misconception of Theravada "prohibiting attaining enlightenment". If someone claiming to be Theravada rejects someone from "attaining enlightenment", they aren't Theravada cause that's not how it works, you can't "prohibit" that. As long as you haven't committed the sin of harming buddha (who is no longer with us), harming a monk, killing your parents and breaking up the monks, you can attain enlightenment. Monk, men, women, and children, anyone can attaining enlightenment so long as they follow buddha's teaching.
The speaker speaks of his “feelings”, and an astonishing simplification and generalization on a vast topic that carries a divisive tone. If the speaker has studied and practiced both traditions in-depth, I would listen and think about his views. There are in-depth lectures available for those truly interested in understanding instead of drawing lines. For an ordinary householder, I would stick to studying the Buddha’s words and practice practice practice rather than paying attention to such divisive generalizations.
I feel the video was not a comparison but a biased one.
Mahayana is Buddha inspired, but so far removed from his teaching adding additional texts.
@@Jonathan-jp4zz Modern Theravada tradition derives from the Taamrashaatiya school of Buddhism of Sri Lanka, which arose in the late middle ages. Theravadins cannot claim their school to be pure because their roots originate from Non-Magadhic roots.
Someone who follows Theravada is going to think a person who follows Mahayana is wrong. The converse is also true. If they didn't think the other side was wrong, they would folllow it. An outsider could give a more objective description of the differences between the two branches. If you thank a
Mahayana would give a better description, you are mistaken, their very name for Theravada, Hinayana is meant ad an insult.
What I would say is the issue between the last stage of the Path, whether bodhisattva or enlightenment applies to .01% of Buddhist or less. Better to focus on the parts of the Path that affects most. This is a discussion only relevant for a small number of monastics.
No he is totally right.
it seems there is a silent war going on between theraveda practitioner and mahayana practitioner. even after 12 years in the robes.. i wish we could have a serious discussion and come to peace because i think there is just misunderstanding between each other..
I was a Catholic Monk for 10 years, and it turned me into a Buddhist. I found Theravada to be the "easiest" for me to adapt to. Like in Christianity, Buddhism has a paradox; Does your faith prove your works of love and kindness or do your works of love and kindness prove that you are practicing a faith? In other words, am I caring for others because of who I already am, or is it because of who or what I am trying to be? I feel like it's probably a little bit of both, but practice must be engaged in the community (Sangha) in order for it to bare any fruit.
being a christian monk made you a theravada buddhist? This is interesting. I wonder how that happens? Was it based on theology/teaching or some personal experience like insight of the nature of reality?
Based on your explanation, it sounds like not a monk at all
It was because I came to the conclusion, through several years of intense study, that anything dogmatic was a made up fallacy and that the social gospel and the love of our community is all there really is. I wanted to engage in that, so I left the Abbey and became a social worker.
@@tatemorgan5576 Hmm, but Buddhism teaches us that there are 80,000 dharmma gates/doors and each sect is but one. All religions have paths to enlightenment. Did you ever become acquainted with Catholic meditation methods? Or sects that are actually devoted to the path? Carmelites, Discalced Carmelites, Camaldolese, Carthusians, etc? Lectio Divina? Stuff from St. Teresa, St. John of the Cross, Bernadette Roberts, etc? Buddhism is great too but there was already a path available. Jesus teaches noself and non-duality is an experience that is discussed in all religions.
I don't have any buddhist community near me unfortunately. I am really interested in Theravada buddhism. Do I really need a community to learn the teachings? Will I not be able to get to nirvana just by following the teachings by myself ?
another difference could it be that many mahayana schools are hibridized with non buddhist beliefs and practices, with some supersticious and idolatric rituals that do not relate to Buddha's original teachings? I am interested in becoming a Buddhist but was a bit put off to see in some temples a lot of weird images of gods and goddesses, and practicioners getting their samadhi dispersed by what seemed to me nonsensical prayers to imaginary beings, and also idolatric devotion to living masters... Is it not a basic tenet of Buddha"s thought to strive to get rid off all delusion? to experience by oneself the real nature of things instead of blindly believing a master"s words?
For this reason I feel Theravada buddhism to be more minimalist, sober and faithful to Buddha' s teachings... but lately I have been reading about the unfair treatment some Theravadan schools dispense to Bikkhunis, their refusal to grant them full ordination as nuns... and was very bewildered by the very contradiction of this attitude with a true compassionate Buddhist heart..Thanks for your videos
Hey! A Sri Lankan Buddhist here! The truth is that it's the same with Theravada, and there is a reason for that. One of the main reasons why Buddhism successfully spread out to such an extent out of India is that it would reinterpret local beliefs and absorb them into Buddhist practice in a way that it wouldn't contradict the Dhamma or Vinaya. Thus, local customs, traditions and objects of veneration would be absorbed into the Buddhist tradition of particular regions. This is universal with Buddhism everywhere, even today. For example, in the West, Theravada practices related to faith ( Sraddha ) and merit accumulation are downplayed in favor of meditation and "enlightenment now", while in Sri Lanka, practices related to Sraddha and merit accumulation take a very significant role. In fact, Sraddha is considered to be a very quick way to enter into the stages of enlightenment.
Mahayana, while it does put more emphasis on faith and worship over Theravada, is much more intellectually rigorous and philosophical than Theravada in my opinion. Bhante here, I'm afraid to say, has taken Mahayana ideas out of context and simplified them to such a degree that it misses the point and is just way off. This is a really common thing with Theravada monks and scholars. It should also be noted that sectarianism is rife in Buddhism as it is in any other world religion. And a fact that many ignore is that historically, early Theravada was influenced by Mahayana too. Mahayana and Theravada are much more recent distinctions in the history of Buddhism than most people think. I suggest you explore both schools in more depth.
I agree. It would be nice to dispute metaphysics without worrying about unclean spirits TIBET cough, cough. #shudder
You might find Eastern Orthodox Christianity appealing (despite the proliferation of misguided fundamentalists on the internet). We have a homegrown tradition of meditative prayer with historic crossover to Sufism.
@@joachim847 tib#COUGHCOUGH#et. what a mess that is.
Bhikkhus, before my enlightenment, while I was still a bodhisatta, not yet fully
enlightened, it occurred to me: “What now is feeling? What is the origin of feeling? What is the way leading to the origination of feeling? What is the cessation of feeling? What is the way leading to the cessation of feeling? What is the gratification in feeling? What is the danger? What is the escape?”
"What is the origin of feeling?"
the heart?!???
I'd put it this way... Theravada is the way as taught by the Buddha to achieve nibbana in this very life, through full dedication to one own cultivation, as the Lord Buddha did, and originally intended. But this way would be too difficult for many, and would prevented many from entering the stream. Thus Mahayana is a way to plant seeds of Buddhism as it allows Buddhism to be practiced in a way adaptable to local customs. Such as worshipping using mantras (which are basically hymns and praises in Sanskrit), seeking bodhisattas (which can manifest as gods or humans) to pave a starting path for the common folk. The divergence started when the teachings were overly expounded to make it simple for the common folk (albeit may make things more complicated - such as the strict vegetarian diet, which Buddha did not force unto the monks)... However, if we look into the soul of its teachings, it is still essentially Buddhism. A Buddhist is basically a person who takes refuge in the Triple Gems. Both roads point to the same goal...
nope.
BIG NOPE.
you havent researched enough, its obvious.
fair warning to everyone reading the above - NOPE.
@@thekaizer666 big yes
Lol im confused now. Idk if your right or wrong @thekaizer666
@@desmondw1987 he sucks , the emotions he presents are all but completely ignorant. Real knowledge comes from calm mind.
@@desmondw1987 dont just believe what i said. FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF. investigate.
go to chatgpt, and ask your deepest, toughest, questions about theravada vs mahayana. its a literal machine thats filled with ALL the knowledge available on the whole vast internet.
or, you can rely on the words of some random dumbass whom goes around name-calling others, just because his/er chosen delusion/ brainwashing was put under scrutiny.
I think the main problem and source of contention here is a difference in definition of what true enlightenment is. On the one hand, the Theravadin and shravakayana view is that enlightenment is the attainment of arahatship in nirvana. On the other hand, the bodhisattvayana contends that this is not final enlightenment and that true enlightenment is buddhahood which is obtained after the 10th bhumi on the boddhisattva path. In my opinion, its just a difference in view but the goal and the end result are exactly the same. The whole idea of arguing one side as better than the other is not really a productive discussion. Let the Theravadin have their view and the Bodhisattva a different view. Same mountain, different road.
I don't think so, since Mahayana contents or presents Bodhicitta and Emptiness, in a way totally unknown in the Shravakayana.
Spot on talk from monk Sarana. I think studying history shows how humans can really alter things, even in quite contrast to the historical Buddhas teachings. But all tradions are still rich and helpful. I spent 4 years attending a Tibtean centre. Changed my life for the better. Now following Ahjan Sonas teachings. Thervada.
Which is where it is interesting to find out about the meeting between the Dalai Lama and Goenka, after which the Dalai Lama sent his higher disciples to take a Vipassana retreat, ( asked to temporarily forget about their rites and rituals ) with good results :)
Don't compare goenka with dalai lama
@@DeadPool-fk6ix one is a politician , second is beyond description.
@@DeadPool-fk6ix He didn't. Read again.
@@lovelife1867False. His Holiness the Dalai Lama abandoned politics in 2011. And he' beyond description, since he's Avalokiteshvara.
@@Buddhist_Philosopher There is no holiness because it does not exist. We are all dreaming this reality.
If one would like a more nuanced and learned exposition of this topic without the hasty generalizations I recommend a talk by a Theravadin monk with many years of experience in both streams of Buddhism - Venerable Bhikkhu Bodhi. The talk is titled Bridging the Two Vehicles and can be found on UA-cam.
thank you for this!
From the explanation of bodhisatta in Spk it appears that the Pāli commentarial tradition recognizes alternative etymologies of the word, as equivalent either to Skt bodhisattva (“an enlightenment being”) or to *bodhisakta (“one devoted to enlightenment”)
Dear Ven. I would like to use your Video in my channel as well because I want share this knowledge to Cambodian who can understand English and I hope you don't mind Thanks Sarana
Theravadins and before them the proto-Theravadin schools suffered thousands of years of discrimination by self-proclaimed Mahayanists many of whom were viewed as writing their own sutras and creating new Buddhas outside of the Pali cannon as if these sutras had been spoken by the Buddha. Just today I sat in a session delivered by a Vajrayana monk who referred to Theravada as Hinayana yet again - the discarded, inferior vehicle. This mindset has soured relations for millennia and persists. We need to move away from this language and focus on our core doctrines that bind us. There is the “Way of the Elders”, the “Great Vehicle” and the “Diamond Way”. Whichever school you choose, be happy in that and never disparage others.
Anatta is a central doctrine of Buddhism. It marks one of the major differences between Theravada Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism. According to the anatta doctrine of Original Buddhism, at the core of all human beings and living creatures, there is no "eternal, essential and absolute something called a soul, self or atman".Buddhism, from its earliest days, has denied the existence of the "self, soul" in its core philosophical and ontological texts. In its soteriological themes, Buddhism has defined nirvana as that blissful state when a person, amongst other things, realizes that he or she has "no self, no soul".
Original Buddhism ?? Good luck
Annatta is not a doctrine is a state of mind --and is not different from Mahayana
both schools/sects recognize anatta
@@tsurugi5 true although in Mahayana we have the 3 bodies, the Dharmakaya (Ultimate Reality) , the Sambhogakaya (Reward Body), the Nirmanakaya (Physical Body)
Must know that reincarnantion and reborn are 2 diferent things
Namo Buddhaya Bhante. Is that any way we may spot an enlightened person (since it is mentioned in the video that an enlightened person can be reborn) while this person still at young age? Or it'll take an enlightened person to recognize another enlightened person?
It's almost impossible to tell one is enlightened. Maybe easy to tell one is NOT. Based on Suttas, enlightened Sotapannas don't usually take human birth. There was none in Suttas. It is impossible to know if the newborn baby is reborn Ariya. (Sotapanna or Sakadagami) Reincarnation stories are fake news from Tibet.
only an arahant will be able to recognize another arahant.
and even so, an arahant one self may be able to conceal/ hide the fact that he's an arahant, when its necessary/ suitable.
we lay people, unattained, with no abhinna developed, have next to zero chances of ascertaining.
now i feel conned.
i didnt know what i was doing,
was at the lowest point of my life,
contemplating s00icide every other hour,
finally threw myself into buddhism (i loved zen),
attended this meetup/ gathering,
and before i knew it,
it was the part where we were taking the Mahayana vows and all that.
which i took!
and then, a few years later down the road,
after REALLY reading the Lotus Sutra,
and finding out that the Mahayana has been calling names and insulting Theravada,
and through a WHOLE BUNCH of really intense research,
i realized there is SOMETHING REALLY WRONG with Mahayana (and Vajrayana).
so, now im ALL-IN on theravada,
because back then, i was completely ignorant and hadnt done enough research and study!
will this make me an Oathbreaker?!?
whats gonna happen to my kamma???
SIIIIGH.
“In the past, it is said, after having fulfilled the pāramīs over eight inconceivable periods and 100,000 eons, the bodhisatta Kassapa was reborn in the womb of a brahmin woman named Dhanavatī, wife of the brahmin Brahmadatta. That same day his chief disciple also passed away from the deva world and was reborn in the womb of the wife of the brahmin who served as assistant chaplain. Thus the two were conceived on the same day and emerged from the womb on the same day, and on the same day [281] their elders gave the name Kassapa to one and the name Tissa to the other.”
Excerpt From
The Suttanipata
Good one to bring up 'pāramīs' here. In my view.
Both school compliments each others
i listened half way i i couldnt listen any further. sorry monk sarana, i am exposed by mahayana first, and my understanding is nothing like what you explained. seems to me you yourself have a very big misunderstanding on mahayana. e.g. one very good example is your misunderstanding on the vow. mahayana dont teach us to vow not to attain buddhahood until every other one does. that vow is ksitigabhar bodhisatvas' vow. Is HIS vow. he didnt ask us all to vows the same. mahayana never once said we cannot atain buddhahood in this life. everyone can attain buddhahood in this life as long as he practice the buddha's way. Similarly, as an mahayana exposed student, i did not disagree with theravadas teaching like what you claiming. instead i agrees it all! and in fact, i'm practicing it! meditation, observation, being neutral.. (only those i can afford to practise now)
Correct, very big misunderstanding about Mahayana
Can someone explain to me the basics of Thai Theravada Buddhism? And can laypeople become Enlightened in Thai Theravada Buddhism?
What about the role of women in Theravada buudhism? How involved in study & growth can they become, anything past a layperson?
^
Theravada rejects give any place to women in the monastic Sangha.
It's definitely not true that Theravada rejects women having a place as monastics.
The original Bhikkhuni lineage died in Sri Lanka some centuries ago. However, there have been several modern efforts to reinstate it. The situation is just complex.
Some sects have made an attempt to revive the Bhikkhuni order, most notably in Sri Lanka. There's thousands of Bhikkhunis in Sri Lanka. Their ordinations were done with the help of Korean Bhikkhunis who could trace their lineage back to the Buddha.
In Thailand and Myanmar, fully ordained Bhikkhunis are not recognized by the state, but women often live similar to Samaneri (novices), taking 10 precepts.
@@saintsword23 That's a rather simplification of the discrimination against women to be ordeined. The responsables of that ban in those three countrys are not the goverments, but the group of patriarch theravadin leaders in those countrys who rejects the Dharmaguptaka ordenation in Taiwan. That's why new formal ordenation was held in Australia far from the hard establishment of theravadines on those three countrys.
@@Buddhist_Philosopher You literally claimed that Theravada does not have a place for female monastics...and are now accusing me of oversimplifying the situation? Pot, meet kettle.
The situation is complex, but saying that there's no nun's order in Theravada is just not the case. There's about 1500 nuns in Sri Lanka, but ya, Ajahn Brahm has tried to get it going in Australia as well. He's been expelled by the Thai Forest tradition for doing it and was asked to vacate his monastery back in 2009 as a consequence.
Further, there are female novices (10 precept renunciates) even in places that don't have a full Bhikkhuni order. So even without the full Bhikkhuni sangha there's still a place for female renunciates.
It's controversial in the Theravada world, for absolutely sure, but saying it's just not a thing is the oversimplification.
Hi, I just wondering bhante would teach us(a video) about nibbana and stages jhana in simpler terms... thank you
He was just stating some uncomfortable facts about Mahayana. Even the Buddha prophesized that the Dhamma will gradually disappear through distortions and convenient interpretations of the Dhamma. That's why in some Mahayana schools you will find monks who are still married totally goes against Buddha's teachings.
There's a history about how the split came to be after the 2nd Buddhist Council, when Mahadeva posed five questions that led to the formation of the Mahasangika school, which eventually became Mahayana. The Mahasangika faction was actually the larger of the two, with the Sthaviravada being the school that gave rise to many schools, one of which would eventually be Theravada. The Mahasangika was comprised of many monks who were dissatisfied with the Vinaya (monk's code of conduct the Buddha set forth) while the Sthaviravada kept the old code.
The five questions Mahadeva asked were, viewed in a modern light, rather silly and clearly were born of wrong view. Mahayana also added a lot of sutras they claim were spoken by the Buddha but clearly were later inventions. While I have a lot of respect for Zen in particular, and I think the Rinzai emphasis on koans is innovative and effective, knowing the history and being familiar with the Pali Canon and Mahayana scriptures both has led me to form the conclusion that Mahayana is clearly not what the Buddha taught, and the more devotional schools of Mahayana are so far removed from the Buddha's teaching that they should (lovingly! kindly!) be chastised for wrong view.
@vikingspirit It's closer, but still not exact.
Ajahn Sujato, for instance, produced a list of discrepancies between modern Theravada practice and what is in the earliest Buddhist texts.
Some examples include: (1) the earliest texts explain that consciousness of any sort is suffering but many Theravada sects believe that the mind continues on after Arahantship, (2) dry insight like the Goenka school is just not a thing in the early texts, and (3) there were no restrictions on teaching laypeople the deepest meditative techniques in the early suttas.
His list is more extensive but those are some examples.
@vikingspirit Yongey Mingyur Rinpochè - Karma Kagyu, Tibetan Buddhism.
@vikingspiritIt's Vajrayana and Mahamudra.
@@saintsword23 It seems to me that your conclusion is wrong, because you believe that the only validity of a text is the date of its composition. *And the content of the Doctrine??* The only thing that the dating of texts shows, is that the basic doctrinal current of the Mahayana was already present long before the Mahayana was formed, and belongs to a common root with the original Sthaviravadins.
@@Buddhist_Philosopher "It seems to me that your conclusion is wrong, because you believe that the only validity of a text is the date of its composition."
The date of a text is a necessary part of its authenticity, but not sufficient.
For example: there's many texts written during the Buddha's time, but are rejected as authentic because the doctrines they assert directly contradict much more widely accepted texts. So, just being an old text is not sufficient.
However, it is necessary. There is an entire corpus of Mahayana literature written hundreds of years after the Buddha that claims to be the words of the Buddha, but the text first shows up hundreds of years later and is never referenced by any other text before the time it shows up. This makes it very likely the text is not authentically the words of the Buddha, but a later addition made by a Buddhist school.
Since virtually all the Mahayana corpus (Heart Sutta, Diamond Sutta, etc) is like this, I reject the Mahayana as inauthentic. I mean, the Diamond Sutta reads like an early 2000s chain email, talking about how propagating it will give one all these wonderous benefits.
Doesn't Zen teach that one can become enlightened in this life?
Dont know Zen, but Lotus Sutras for sure teachs that. Shingon too but they differ on how to attain it and how much time
What is it that becomes enlightened?
Yes it does but zen is part of the mahayana
@@youngforeverlastingyfl1832 So what is the meaning of Bodhisattva vow in Zen Buddhism?
@@rafaelecattonar1506 the one that holds off nirvana. I rather not that's why I chose theravada. Zen teaches that one can achieve but aslo teaches to not achieve. That's why my school gets called selfish alot
Well Explained. 🙏 Sadhu 🙏 Sadhu 🙏 Sadhu
Why do you celebrate something so pernicious as sectarism?
@@Buddhist_Philosopher, Brahamanism influenced or developed Mahayana tradition with the help of Chandraguptha Maurya's invation of the Buddhist Magadha Kingdom with the help of Brahaman Chanakya. Therefore, we should know the difference between them.
@@smlanka4u The Tantras are esoteric transmissions in visions from the Buddhas to the Mahasiddhas of India. Although it has Hindu elements. We should know differences but maintining an open mind.
@@Buddhist_Philosopher, They have tried to recommend themselves by using the word Maha (Great) to mention the developers of the Mahayana tradition and Mahayana. It is an indication of their ego. And Brahaman's caste system depends on ego too. Also, some societies try to use tricks like that to make them superior than others. Ego divides people like that, and prevents seeing the truth clearly. The ultimate truths and their processes mentioned in Theravada Abhidhamma are very important to understand the nature of reality as it is, without depending on believes. Best of luck. Bye.
If there is No Self (Annata) and no hard substance but just process does this mean only the Karma is transferred during the rebirth from one Individual to the next? And does this mean a individual is reborn not only after death but also in the mid of lifetime. Or another question: are some of the 5 Skandhas much longer present then others (for example a spirit that could be transferred) from one individual to the next? And maybe a last question: Could Nirwana something like a world-soul that is - in the form of Buddha Nature (as long as it is not just a potential to become Buddha) - eternal and already us, as all humans, and finally reached when we have left Samsara?
I think you should read more books about mahayana.
Already found nirvana yet its not a huge boom like i expected its more a slow growing peace that makes things empty like ideas point of view etc and if deep enough in it i cant give one f if in pain its helping to keep me alive
What's the issue with hugging one's knees? Genuine query, I reall don't know this requirement.
I think it is in the "Vinaya Pitaka" a rule not to preach if someone hugging the knees. that means they are not interested/respect in the preaching.
The posture of sqatting is disrespectful way of sitting to receive the Dhamma.
( its used when defacing)
then what is Vajrayana buddhism and you tell what is Theravada view on that ?
Those awakened ones (sambuddhā). Spk: There are four kinds of awakened ones: omniscient Buddhas, paccekabuddhas, “four-truth awakened ones” (i.e., arahant disciples), and those awakened through learning. The first three types are indicated in the present context. They fare evenly amidst the uneven: they fare evenly amidst the uneven common domain of the world, or amidst the uneven community of sentient beings, or amidst the uneven multitude of defilements.
The seed the Buddha planted is alive, which is the core essence of Buddhism, and this separates it from every other mythology or religion.
Why people get confused over both schools in my opinion is this -- The Buddha started of with teaching his inner circles with more sophisticated teachings and slowly expanded to teach the outer circle a less complex teachings. The latter teachings were first revealed, and the former came out much later after the death of Guatama Sadhata.
Why i think Mahayana is closer to the Buddha's core teachings is this. The Buddha on his way to sick enlightenment, went through many challenges, the key one being his disciples abandoning him when he gave up practising arseticism.
Upon enlightenment, he didn't just disappear and stopped manifesting. Rather, he came back to share his enlightenment with others and showed them the way. Mahayana practices just that, whereas Theravada doesn't really practice that.
In Theravada, once you reach Nirvana, you stop manifesting in this world, which from a Mahayanist point of view is dualistic.
Nice teaching since i travel to thailand and i been a vajrayana follower because my country where i live doesnt have a theravada temple only chinese vajrayana(This school at least follows buddhas rules and it feels freewill) and nichiren mahayana. In Thailand i learn that theravada its better than mahayana but i like some mahayana chants and probably i could visited a mahayana temple in vietnam or other places but honestly i think your explanation its good about the subject and The thailand sangha its more balanced for my way of live.
also the mahayanas most of the monks and the people follow a strict vegan diet and i think The buddha did not teach that. So i guess they lose some buddhas teachings or prefer to change it.
i wonder if some indians who were vegan enter in the buddhist sangha and change some rules when the buddha passed away. It could be devadattas people ?
The monks who eat meat are the one who like to change Buddha's teachings
Buddha always favours vegetarianism
@@kaustubhnigam628 I wont answer to people who are in a confusion state of mind.
@@Budismo7917 I wasn't expecting answer from someone who wouldn't be able to answer 🙏
@@kaustubhnigam628 If someone donates the meat to a monk and declines the offering there's an EGO on that. You cant say ' I am a vegetarian or vegan" (that's an ego trap). So I would try to say that if somebody donates, you are willing and thankful to accept it. I hope it will help.
@@enlightenedperspectives1111 I know from where are you coming from
Here , a dhammapada verse for you :
All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting
oneself in the place of another, one should not
kill nor cause another to kill. 🙂
I just dont get the concept why you dont want to be born again. What happens when you escape Samsara?
United Color of Bhudhism 🌈 🙏
what if you are tricked into enlightenment?
i know for example that in zen, you are given a riddle that causes your mind to shut down or self-implode, which leads to a spontaneous enlightenment.
basically, mahayana budhists are susceptible to spiritual trolling..
just because something is doctirnally not possible, does not mean its not technically possible! otherwise, theere would be only 1 religion, but there are many...
so there is one mountain top and many paths that lead to it.. not just theravada or mahayana.. just my 2 cents..
When he said First, 2nd, 3rd and 4th level of Enlightenment, does he mean achieve Jhana level 1 to 4?
No this are different things. You can achieve all of the Jhana's and still not be in any of the levels of enlightenment.
Ashin Sarana, in the practice of Dzogchen, we recognize that all paths are but skillful means to guide sentient beings to the direct experience of their own true nature-beyond words, beyond distinctions, beyond schools.
Your assertion that Mahayana does not aim for enlightenment seems to be a cloud obscuring the sky. In the heart of Mahayana, and especially in practices like Dzogchen, enlightenment is not a distant goal but the immediate recognition of our intrinsic Buddha-nature. The Bodhisattva vow is not a chain but a boundless expression of compassion emanating from this realization.
Mara prolly made mahayana. Marayana.
What about Vajrayana?
Tibetan Bön religion mixed with fake 'Mahayana'
k: Bodhi is knowledge; a being endowed with bodhi is a bodhisatta, a knowing one, a wise one, a sagely one. For from the time he forms his aspiration at the feet of former Buddhas, that being is always wise, never a blind fool. Or else, just as a mature lotus that has risen up above the water and is due to blossom when touched by the sun’s rays is called “an awakening lotus,” so a being who has obtained the prediction (to future Buddhahood) from the Buddhas and who will inevitably fulfil the perfections (pāramī) and attain enlightenment is called an awakening being (bujjhanasatta); he is a bodhisatta. One who lives yearning for enlightenment-the knowledge of the four paths-is devoted to, attached to, enlightenment (bodhiyaṃ satto āsatto); he is a bodhisatta.
The speaker seems to have some misunderstanding about Mahayana. Speaker better discusses again with more practitioners
Theravada Is Real Buddhism.
Yes
Whatever- u play politics with Buddhism without even know the suttras
@@nikolaskolonias3235 Correct.
Yes 🙏
Have you ever heard of Gandhara?
I suppose the first question is what's the purpose of attaining nirvana. Is it solely to relieve one's personal suffering on their singular journey to enlightenment or is eternal nirvana only achieved when all pieces of the conscious collective have emancipated themselves back to the whole
Have you heard about Lamrim?
Obviuosly this dude has no clue.
@@Buddhist_Philosopherfake buddhists))) 😂
I don't care what ever you call me. as far as i cannot realize nibbana still in circle of samsara i still in sadness, so named like theravada mahayana or etc useless for me, if i cannot free from circle of samsara.?i just do and practices to be free from circle of samsara .i believe.buddham saranam gachami.dhammam saranam gachami.sanggham saranam gachami. I believe.anicca.dukkha anatta.i belive karma and what buddha saying and teaching.i believe some day i will be free.
Bhante, can i ask you for some q`s?
Thank you for this insight!
Frankly, I am speechless when I hear what this no-longer monk explains Mahayana, forbids one to attain Enlightment "in one life" and have to be "reborn" !! As he said monks of both schools lack understanding of the other school, is he the exception to this and excels other Theravada monks in this repect ? Buddhism is all encompassing and accomodates all externalities without losing or changing our Buddhahood "随緣不變，不變随緣‘’. Theravada is the building block of Mahayana, its very fundamental. Without studying Theravada, one cannot fully understood Mahayana and this is very much the sequence how Buddha taught.
self effort to achieve beyond heavens is very hard in this ending age hence we hav to rely on the Buddha power also to achieve it n most of the celestial beings are into Buddha name chanting method too to go higher up ,
the hint is in the Ksitigarbha Sutra.
Theravada method is not suitable for Celestial beings to practice ,
for instance ,
the beings in Formless heaven aka without physical body ,only consciousness remains they mentally chant Buddha names to achieve Buddhas Pureland.
read any Mahayana Sutra , a few chapters n then use your absorbed knowledge n ask yourself a question,
isit possible for human minds capability to write those sutras ?
The 7 lives are 7 bodies.. From physical to cosmic and then nirvana..
@Jayson Byrne I didn't call Nirvana a body.. I just said there are 7 bodies before nirvana..
@Jayson Byrne I would interpret nothing.. I would believe my own experience..
@Jayson Byrne 😊
One of my teachers Cha’n /zen, teaches we can be enlightened and break the rebirth cycle in this life!
Did hi say how, why didn't you asked him are you enlited
@@chamithathukorala1985 He did say how. However I did not wanted to spend a lot of time trying to re-explain here and come off like I am challenging this path. Nor did I feel I needed.
In Theravada this world of form is real and something to escape.
In Mahayana this world of form is an illusion that must be seen as such.
Its like the difference between escaping from a real prison cell, and pretending the walls aren't real...so what is the point of escape?
Theravada is real Buddha's way. Mahayana appear after buddha parinibana. Mahayana like samawi region just for ......
With all due respect Banti, but I have to say that you are giving wrong explanation of Theravada and Mahayana. You need to study more on Tripitaka or Buddha’s teaching. And commentary on Buddhist teachings. There is big difference between Samma -Sam Buddha and Arhats. To become a Buddha. It needs to accumulate countless of paramis and take a vow of bodhisattva. Over the subsequent aeons, the bodhisattva would renew his vow in the presence of each of the buddhas who came after Dipamkara, before becoming the buddha Shakyamuni himself. Over the course of his lifetimes as a bodhisattva, he accumulated merit (punya) through the practice of 6 (or 10) virtues. After his death as Prince Vessantara, he was born in the Tusita Heaven, whence he surveyed the world to locate the proper site of his final birth.
- Thera means elder . Theravada is also known as doctrine of the elders. There were Bodhisattva practitioner in Theravada Buddhism. It’s all depends on motivation. I can’t explain everything there. All want to say that please preach right information to people. Because you’re wearing monk rope. Thank you
I didn't find anything in his explanation that is factually incorrect. He has an obvious bias toward Theravada, but he acknowledges this and perhaps it is for good reason.
Mahayana monks must take the Boddhisatva vow, Theravada monks get a choice. The Buddha simply encouraged getting to enlightenment asap.
He is right. it's Mahayanists who misinterpret Buddhism and misguide it's followers.
9:47 "If you hug your knees, I cannot tell you anything about Dhamma." Really? That's a bit harsh, isn't it?
Yes I am confused
It's a monk's rule in the Vinaya.
@@lewkirk821 it's a vinaya rule if someone is hugging his knees/standing/walking/ doing any other body posture not to teach them dharma as it seems he is not interested/respectful to the preaching.
LOL retarded laws of Moses.
Why two, must only one.
Which one is the true Buddhism?
Both ,There is just one scripture. 2 interpretations
ALL Buddhist sect are true it’s what fits you the most,
There’s Self-Power & Other-Power
Even a cursory reading of the Pali scriptures will show that Mahayana is (lovingly!) simply not what the Buddha taught. There's elements of what the Buddha taught in it of course, but they add a lot of stuff that is just incorrect. Bante gets at some of it in this video, but 11 minutes is not enough to cover such a vast topic of course!
It's not simply a matter of different interpretation. The Mahayana scriptures, like the Diamond Sutra, are required for it to make sense, but these scriptures were later additions and clearly never spoken by the Buddha (their tone and approach is completely out of step with the rest of the Canon and no extent copies exist prior to centuries after the Buddha's paranibbana).
Therdu Therdu Therdu
🙏🙏🙏
U r describing the minds and talks of laymen - people...pls talk to thosewho are well disciplined and practitioners in these subjects. Eg: about enlightenment- mahayana too tells that one can attain in this very lifetime.(however gautama himself had several lifetime before attaining buddha as described in his life story)...also misunderstanding or accusing of about not knowing the ultimate nature of mind on either school (theravada And Mahayana) of buddhism is an irony because it's the same buddha with variety of principle and practices laid out to different people with different temperament and capacities....but it's good to see your commitment and pls do practice diligently...knowledge will always vary depending many factors..may u attain enlightenment.
hallo this bhikku dont understand about mahayana and theravada. they both same.. but they are is from another tradition.. only that.. there same
They aren't the same sir ..
I didn't find anything in his explanation that is factually incorrect. He has an obvious bias toward Theravada, but he acknowledges this and perhaps it is for good reason. The two have some similarities but also some big differences.
No. He is right you wrong
Full enlightened choices in theravada 🙏🏻🇹🇭🇯🇵🇻🇳🇮🇸🇦🇺🇧🇻🇩🇰🇮🇹🇰🇭🇲🇳🇸🇳🇧🇹🇨🇦🇨🇮👍🏻
Mongolian is Tibetan Buddhism
Zen or Chan is more prevalent than either
In mahayana, even the buddha willing to be born again, to save other beings, like the samyakdharmavidya buddha, that incarnate become Avalokitesvara bodhisattva.
I dont know the basis you can say that mahayana prohibits someone to be an anuttarasamyaksambuddha 😐
Namo Buddhaya 🙏
For an outsider what seems astonishing is that both these directions preach consistant meditation practice. So after countless hours of meditation practice for years after years which is supposed to bring deep insights etc. ---you have monks saying the other group does not get it. Pretty bleek outlook if you ask me. Makes me almost believe that many of those supposed insights are fabrications of individual minds, not some relative, let alone ultimate truth.
BTW one interesting side note: Buddha himself never called his path "Buddhism". He actually called it "Brahmacharya" ---the path to the absolute. Those that drift closely towards nihilistic points of view should keep that in mind---Buddha designed a practice or way and named it: the path to the "absolute".
Very precise elaboration, great monk!! 🙏❤️
I think as Theravada evolve into Mahayana it starts to become more grandiose and gain more cult-like characteristics
Half baked people like him will soon spoil Buddhism.
Give contrapoints
@@zhugeliangkongming479 Well research pal. If a blind leads blind is a classic example of such comment and following such cult Buddhist teacher.
@@RaginYak what he is saying is actually what is written in Pali suttas
@@zhugeliangkongming479 Where in Mahayana states enlightenment is not possible in this life time?
@@RaginYak no where
Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu !
Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu
Mahayana Buddhist Sutras were found in the caves of Mahasangika and Sthavirada, which existed thousand years before Theravada came into existence. Mahayana believe that enlightenment is possible this life.
@@alfredpangchichiang What are you on about Theravada started in 3rd century BCE while Mahayana started in 1st century BCE.
@@thekingminn Theravada started only la few hundred years after the Mahasangika and Sthavirada. The Mahasangika already had Mahayana Sutras hundreds of years before the Theravada sect was developed
@@thekingminnMahayana is divided into 3 phases: 1) Prajna Paramita (Wisdom) School, 2) Buddha-Nature or Consciousness only School, and 3) Mantrayana/Vajrayana. The Mantrayana/Vajrayana School is definitely taught not by the Buddha but by Padmasambava. Tibetan Buddhists acknowledge this. Mahayana sutras (e.g. Surangama sutra) that has long dharani or mantra sometimes contains the names of Hindu Deity such as Tara, Ganesha and even the names of various ghosts.
Why is hugging your knees an obstacle to teaching dhamma?
It's one of the monk's rules. Others in the same section of the vinaya include not teaching Dhamma on a moving vehicle or to someone holding a weapon.
The reason why was a matter of etiquette. Back in the Buddha's day it was considered impolite to hug your knees.
There's a lot of rules that those of us living in a different place at a different time may consider unnecessary or archaic, but the Theravadin monks still keep to the original rules laid down by the Buddha.
Do theravada believe there is a self?
n0
@@ankaralion Thanks
Bhante Sarana has many misunderstandings of Mahayana and should refrain from explaining it, thus spreading the misunderstanding even further. Those who want to know Mahayana should learn from the right teacher. The practice of Mahayana is perhaps not to the taste of everyone, but many have found it more inspiring and helpful.
I didn't find anything in his explanation that is factually incorrect. He has an obvious bias toward Theravada, but he acknowledges this and perhaps it is for good reason.
I have a Mahayana teacher, but my practice is mostly Theravada. I am confused and trying to understand. I found it very helpful.
I didn't know a boddhisatva could be reborn due to his perfect compassion in contrast to the cessation of craving. I was always confused about this.
You seem very insecure about Mahayana teachings, he didn't say anything incorrect, that's probably why you reffer to his as Hinayana. Are teachings only allowed to be in agreement with your views?
samsara=nirvana
nirvana=samsara
bodhi is extremeless
bodhi cannot be entered
and cannot be eschewed
according to my Mahayana teachers, everything taught about Mahayana in this video is incorrect
@Pepeko Mahayana has so many brenchs that he is actually wrong.
Most popular of Mahayana teachs dont even persue nirvana. They teach that you can obtain Buddha body in this life.
@@kuriringdjdhc8352 That's Vajrayana, and is rather rare.
What is the point of becoming a Buddha when you are already Buddha?
It is the Mahayana view that you are "already a Buddha," not the Therevada view.
That's how Mahayana or Marayana contradicts it's corrupt teaching.
Mahayana,Vajrayana, Tantra Yana, Mantra yana Buddhism after 7th century AD Bramhan Converted into Hindu religion in India. Most Of Buddhist Mahayan,Vajrayana Boddhistava, Vihar Bramhan Converted Into Hindu Temple and Hindu God.
Mahayan belive on pure land and they belive one can reborn in pure land and they can be boddhisatavs or buddha.
After the last Buddha reach enlightenment in this planet, there will be 100 quintillion’s planets more until humans and angels can witness another Buddha. That is insanely eon’s and eon’s, long long long time from this planet. That is why if we keep on practicing the Buddha religion some day in this planet we can obtain enlightenment and reach Nirvana. It’s not to late and don’t wishes for to much nonsense because it will alter your future life!
So wrong - many miss understandings on Mahayana this monk
I did not hear anything factually incorrect in what he was saying. He clearly is biased toward Theravada, but he acknowledges this and perhaps it's with good reason.
@@saintsword23 his understanding of Mahayana is wrong
@@nikolaskolonias3235 Do you have specific examples? Just saying it's wrong without examples reads like an emotional reaction rather than a reasoned examination.
@@saintsword23 nothing emotional lol I don’t know the monk- sorry to analyse such philosophical issues will take me almost a day writing. Have a good day
@@nikolaskolonias3235 you cannot show anything he told is wrong about Marayana. you're just offended by the truth he revealed.
🙏
How many became buddhas after the historical buddha? Answer - 0 ZERO :P
Only Hindus can be Buddha. As only Brahmins and Kshatriya are qualified to become a bodhisattvas, as mentioned in the Tripitaks.
@@FromPlanetZX Where does it say this in the Tipitaka? I'm very familiar with the scriptures and I never recall reading this. Can you please find the location?
Just check the fact that billions of Mahayana followers vowed to be Buddha, rejecting enlightenment. How many Buddha did they produce?-- Zero.
There were 512028 buddhas after Lord buddha. We chant everyday in theravada buddhism.
@@FromPlanetZX lol. Joke of the year.
Vandamiy Bhante jee. India 🇮🇳 buddhism ☸
You are a Theravada monk. You should teach the Theravada and not disparage other forms of Buddhism. All forms of Buddhism will bring you to full enlightenment when practiced correctly.
Mahayana won't. Because it's a corrupt teaching
The Mahayana literally make their practitioners take a vow to not reach enlightenment.
@@saintsword23 You are thinking of the Bodhisattva vow. That is more in the Vajrayana than the Mahayana but nowhere is it obligatory. It is done out of compassion not obligation
@@micheleshave323 I'm pretty sure it's obligatory in Zen too.
I am going to assume that you are/were a practicing Zen Buddhist whose teacher told you that this was an obligation. I practiced another form of Mahayana Buddhism for well over a decade within an organization that never once mentioned such a vow. I have heard the Tibetan Buddhists mention it but never implied that it was mandatory. How long did you practice the Mahayana form? I would be very interested to know how to fact check this not to try to settle a dispute but to look into it and if I am wrong to readjust my thinking.
Unless you accept the prior worldview of karma and rebirth, there is no point in Buddhism.
I wouldn't say this is the case. I came from an atheistic background but after much meditation and reflection I know the core teachings about liberation from suffering are essentially correct now. One can discard the more supernatural elements.
what do u do if are awake to a level yet am not a Buddhist? this ego knows what it is and that its fiction like right now no one is even writing this
You hope for discussion. And then all you do is Theravada propaganda. I hoped for more compassion and comprehension of Buddhist fundamental unity. Very sorry 🙏🏼💕
Theravada - I, me, my
Mahayana- others before yourself.
namobudhaya sayang kulo mboten ngerti bahasane mugi mugi sedoyo umat budha rahayuwidodo kalis ing sambekolo ben podo gk ngertine
Where are you getting your information regarding Mahayana from? You're way off.
Cope harder
Here above the monk exposed himself with that one his so endearingly said phrase "...IN OUR THERAVADA...", perhaps. 😮
My dear... yes you can be a great lawyer on the side of your Theravad case, BUT am afraid that here you seem to be trying to PLAY a fair impartial JUDGE !!? 😢
Mahayana is repackaged hinduism
Does Hinduism make sense? Or human liberation from sufferings?
@@boddhiworld714 krishna says in the bhagwat gita that "sarva dharman, parityajya mamekam Sharanam braja"
@@zhugeliangkongming479 Don't understand. I dont know Sanskrit. Can you please explain? Does Hinduism originated from Vedas or Shiva? Does Hinduism suggest human to take Nirvana or reincarnations again and again in order to obtain ultimate enlightenment?
@@boddhiworld714
Hinduism believing God.
You can get relief from suffering by mukthi that's what you call nirvana.
So you have to pray chant meditate do yoga to get mukthi.
@@mr.anonymous7114 mukti is not a package deal that your god can deliver you via mail. Gods are just tool you used on your path to enlightenment.
this difference exists only in the beginning of the path. even an anagami would not see difference. by arhathood you are not "a being that is enlightened" in the common sense anymore
You speak of nothing concerning the Pure lands and the declining Dharma Age.
Is there one person in this modern day that has become fully enlightened? The entire world would know of it.
The Declining Dharma Age is the very reason for the Mahayana - or, more appropriately called, the Bodhisattvayana.
No Dharma gate is better or worse, so no need to say Mahayana or Hiniyana. They both have value.
Theravada is more pragmatic think. More secular
Pragmatism depends on the practitioner. And theravada is mainly for monks.
Theravada believe in hindu gods but mahayana not believe, buddha rejected Hinduism and vedas , I think theravada is not correct
I don't know the reason why you are so misguided
Did your buddha told you.
Don't tell lies.theravada Buddhist not believes hindu gods,Some may believe ,But theravada philosophy considers those gods to be mythical gods ,You must be thinking about India. At present, the correct Theravada Buddhism exists in Sri Lanka
The Buddha sometimes talked about the Hindu gods India believed in in his time (Indra and Mara in particular...Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva were not even a thing yet), but Buddhists do not "believe in" these gods.
Mahayana has amitabha, avalokitesvar, shiva, durga, tara, guyan yin and other thousands of idols to "worship". How about that?
Here is someone talking about Mahayana who very clearly does not understand Mahayana. Anyone who claims to understand ultimate truth (such as this unenlightened and extremely ignorant monk) is a fool. Nothing this monk says about either tradition should be trusted.
It's not Boodha it's Bud-dha
Lmao CANCER
Total nonsense
You selfish 😂😂