Buddhism split: Mahayana emerged

(Buddha's Wisdom) Heretical new texts turn the historical Buddha Shakyamuni's Dharma (Doctrine) on its head, infusing it with the Old Vedic Religion of the Brahmins, Taoism, Hinduism, and later thought, sometimes directly opposing what Gautama Buddha taught about nirvana and samsara and many other things, including the Ten Perfections (reduced by Mahayana to six) and the 31 Planes of Existence (reduced to six)...

"Mindfulness" defined (Ven. Analayo)

Mindfulness in Early Buddhism

Ven. Bhikkhu Analayo (Wiki)

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the understanding of one out of various types of mindfulness descriptions in the Buddhist traditions, namely the notion of mindfulness as reflected in the early Buddhist discourses.

• MNDFULNESS (sati, smirti) means a special kind of nonjudgmental attention, unbiased bare awareness, acceptance (not resistance) of what is but simply watching it with vigilance and wakefulness (Wisdom Quarterly).

INTRODUCTION: A recent survey of research on meditation, prepared for the US Department of Health and Human Services, comes to the rather disconcerting conclusion that “scientific research on meditation practices does not appear to have a common theoretical perspective and is characterized by poor methodological quality.

“Firm conclusions on the effects of meditation practices in healthcare cannot be drawn based on the available evidence. Future research on meditation practices must be more rigorous in the design and execution of studies,” in particular “specific attention must be paid to developing definitions for these [meditation] techniques that are both conceptually and operationally useful. Such definitions are a prerequisite for scientific research.”

The best Buddhists practice Buddhism.

In the case of mindfulness practices, “general descriptions of mindfulness vary from investigator to investigator and there is no consensus on the defining components or processes” [1]. This finding clearly points to a need to invest more time into the conceptual models that stand behind research into the effects of mindfulness practice [2].

While we do have excellent operational definitions of mindfulness that capture the modern-day clinical perspective on this particular mental quality [3], our understanding of mindfulness could be broadened by turning to its definition and mode of function in the Buddhist traditions.

Examining the historical roots of mindfulness in its traditional context would enable ascertaining similarities and differences vis-à-vis the notion of mindfulness in the modern-day setting and perhaps open up new avenues for research into the significance and effects of its cultivation.

The theoretical construct of mindfulness and the practices informed by this notion have gone through considerable development during nearly [2,600] years in the history of Buddhist thought, making it practically impossible to speak of “Buddhist mindfulness” (sati) as if this were a monolithic concept.

Moreover, a proper assessment of any specific form of mindfulness needs to be based on a comparative study that takes into account all extant traditions pertaining to a particular historical period, instead of uncritically relying on a certain school or line of textual transmission because that happens to be the one with which one is personally familiar.

• 

  Analayo shares teacher with WQ: Bhikkhu Bodhi

  Ven. Anālayo is a bhikkhu (Theravada Buddhist monk), scholar, and meditation teacher who was born in Germany in 1962 and went forth in 1995 in Sri Lanka's Theravada monastic tradition. He is best known for his comparative studies of Early Buddhist Texts as preserved by the various Early Buddhist schools. More

Hence, as a starting point for further research into the theoretical foundations of the multiple mindfulnesses found in the various Buddhist traditions, in this paper I take up the notion of mindfulness as reflected in the historically earliest stages of Buddhist thought that is accessible to us through textual records.

"Meditation" means much more than sitting.

These are the early discourses (suttas, sutras, texts) that according to tradition were spoken by the Buddha and his [enlightened] disciples, which have come down to us as part of the canonical scriptures of various Buddhist schools in the Nikāyas (Pali canon) or Āgamas (Sanskrit canon).

In terms of school affiliation, while this material has been transmitted [orally] within reciter lineages that eventually came to be part of the Dharmaguptaka, Sarvāstivāda, or Theravāda schools, and so on, its origins are earlier than the formation of schools.

Hence, comparative study of parallel versions preserved in a variety of Buddhist languages -- such as Chinese, Pāli, Sanskrit, and Tibetan -- offers us a window on the earliest stages in the development of Buddhist conceptions of mindfulness, in as much as these have left their traces in literature [4].

These in turn would have been the starting point for later conceptions of this mental quality and how to cultivate it.

1. The Four Ways of Establishing Mindfulness

Central for my present purpose are descriptions of mindfulness in action, which instruct how establishing mindfulness (Pali satipaṭṭhāna, Sanskrit smṛtyupasthāna) functions as a form of meditation practice.

Independent of whether such instructions are descriptive or prescriptive, they do allow us an assessment of the notion(s) of mindfulness held by those responsible for the formulation of these descriptions.

The early discourses describe four main areas of practice for the establishing of mindfulness, which are: 

1. the body,
2. feelings,
3. mental states,
4. dharmas ["things" detailed in the two Satipatthana Suttas].

A detailed exposition of these four is found in the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta (as well as in the longer Mahā Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta) of the Pāli canon of the Theravāda tradition, with parallel versions found in the Madhyama-āgama and in the Ekottarika-āgama, two discourse collections preserved in Chinese translation [5].

Regarding the first of these two Chinese Āgamas, scholarly opinion generally tends to consider this discourse collection to have been transmitted within the Sarvāstivāda tradition(s) [6].

The school affiliation of the Ekottarika-āgama, however, is still a subject of continued discussion and thus is best considered uncertain [7].

Comparison of the three versions brings to light several differences [8]. In relation to the first area of body contemplation, the three parallel versions agree on taking up the following three topics:

• the body’s anatomical constitution,
• the body as made up of material elements, and
• the stages of decay of a corpse that has been left out in the open to rot away [9].

Early Buddhism is closer to historical Buddha

In the case of the first of these three, according to the fairly similar instructions given in the parallel versions, contemplation of the anatomical constitution of the body requires reviewing its various parts, such as its hair, nails, teeth, and so on [10].

Such reviewing could presumably take place by way of an internal meditative scanning of the body or else as a reflective recollection. This exercise can act as an antidote to conceit and to sensual desire.

The parallel versions agree that an examination of the body’s anatomy should be undertaken from the perspective of the “impure” or “unclean” nature of some of its parts [11].

The term “impure” or “unclean” reflects conceptions prevalent in ancient India [12]. At times the discourses (sutras) employ the alternative term “not beautiful” [13], which in a less provocative manner still conveys the basic objective of deconstructing the attraction of bodily beauty.

Whether “impure” or “not beautiful [compared to its un-deconstructed appearance],” there can be little doubt that carrying out this instruction involves a purposive element of evaluation [14]. At the background of this stands the early Buddhist notion that the attraction of sensuality is based on an erroneous perception [15].

This erroneous [deceptive] or even distorted perception is seen as requiring a form of de-conditioning by inculcating a perception of the body as lacking beauty or even as being impure.

The point of this mode of evaluation is not to nurture in the practitioner an attitude of negativity towards the body [16].

The evaluation introduced into mindfulness practice in this way is meant as a detergent that purifies the mind from sensual attachment to the body, a cleansing process whose final aim is a balanced attitude. More

• Bhikkhu Analayo, Mindfulness in Early Buddhism (PDF), Journal of Buddhist Studies, Vol. XI, (JCBSSL, VOL. XI), 2013; Dhr. Seven (ed.), Wisdom Quarterly

Awaken by self-power or other-power?

Alan Watts; Dhr. Seven, Sayalay, Ashley Wells (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly Wiki edit

In the decadent Kali Yuga, be reborn in Amida's "Western Paradise" instead of bodhi.

Jiriki (self-power) versus tariki (other-power), by our will or another's will, that is the question.

To love ALL means to love ourselves, too.

Can we possibly attain selflessness (anatta, emptiness, the liberating realization that all things are impersonal) by self-will? Can we attain wisdom by our own ignorant efforts of trial and error?

It seems impossible. Or in any case, it seemed impossible until someone did it. Furtively scrambling in the dark, life after life, striving for complete liberation, someone came upon the ultimate truth and was liberated then pointed out the way for others to awaken themselves.

No one saves us but ourselves;

No one can and no one may;

We ourselves must walk the Path;

Buddhas only point the way.

Since then others have awakened to complete wisdom, having been shown the way. These beings are called disciples or followers of buddhas, particularly of a special kind of buddha, the supremely self-enlightened, supremely self-awakened (samma-sam-buddha), who managed to do it on their own over many, many lifetimes.

They weren't really on their own at all. They had a great deal of help all along the way, but as for the final awakening, that was not done under a teacher -- as no enlightened teacher exists when a buddha awakens.

They do it, it is said, by pursuing the development of the Ten Perfections over a long course of samsara (cyclical rebirth) over the span of aeons (kalpas) and great-aeons (mahakalpas), staggering periods of time (Vedic measurement).

Alan Watts on Amitabha's Pure Land

By self or help: jiriki versus tariki

(redirected from Tariki Buddhism)

Jiriki (自力) is one's own strength (will, power). It is the Japanese Buddhist term for self-power, the ability to achieve awakening (bodhi), liberation (moksha), enlightenment (in other words, to reach nirvana) through one's own efforts. Tariki (他力) means "other power," "outside help."

These terms in Japanese Buddhist schools classify methods by whether they rely on oneself (as the historical Buddha advised, particularly in his final admonition for us to "be lamps/islands (dipas) unto ourselves and to strive with diligence) or on an outside force.

Examples of an outside force are a Cosmic Buddha (e.g., Amitabha), God, Brahman, Brahma, or some other agency (higher power, other power, maybe even the group power of the Arya-Sangha, the community of enlightened disciples who followed the historical Buddha's advice).

How does one arrive at final emancipation, deliverance, liberation (moksha), reach the further shore of nirvana (the end of all rebirth and suffering)? How does one become spiritually enlightened? [2]

Jiriki is commonly practiced in Zen Buddhism, as in traditional Theravada (and the earlier "Hinayana" school, none of which survived and the last of which seems to have been the Sarvastivada) Buddhism.

• NOTE: Theravada is a back-to-basics movement, not a surviving form of Hinayana ("Lesser or Smaller Vehicle" schools, but as there are no more Hinayana schools to hurl invective at, ill-informed Mahayana ("Great Vehicle") Buddhists sometimes accuse Theravada as being such a school.

In Pure Land Buddhism, tariki often refers to the power of Amitābha Buddha [3].

Who needs to put for effort like Siddhartha?

These two terms describe the strands of practice that followers of every religion throughout the world develop.

In most religions we can find popular expressions of faith that rely on the worship of external powers such as an idol or "god" of some kind who is expected to bestow favor after being given offerings of faith from a believer (sacrifices, vows, pledges of allegiance).

Some believers of Pure Land Buddhism accept that through faith and reliance on Amitabha Buddha one will be led to enlightenment (salvation).

These are examples of tariki, reliance on a power outside of oneself for salvation.

Self-will

Jiriki is seeking spiritual enlightenment through one's own efforts.

An example of jiriki in Buddhism is the practice of meditation. In meditation, one observes the body (most often in the form of following the breath and mind to directly experience the principles of impermanence and dependent arising or "emptiness"/its impersonal nature or the selflessness) of all phenomena.

Such principles are formally discussed in the Buddhist scriptures, but jiriki implies experiencing them directly for oneself. More

Did the Buddha exist? (City of Dhamma)

Isaline B. Horner (trans.), Milindapanha or "Questions of King Milinda" from The Blessed One’s City of Dhamma (Buddhist Publication Society); Dhr. Seven, Ven. Aloka (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly

In the Greek king's court, Bactria (NW India)

King Milinda [ancient Greek King Menander I] approached Venerable Nagasena, greeted him, and sat down at a respectful distance.

King Milinda, anxious to know, hear, remember, see the light of knowledge, break down the lack of knowledge, to find the light of knowledge, to expel the darkness of ignorance, aroused extreme steadfastness and zeal and mindfulness and clear comprehension, and spoke to Ven. Nagasena:

“Revered Nagasena, have you ever seen the Buddha?”

“No, sire.”

“But have your teachers ever seen the Buddha?”

“No, sire.”

“Revered Nagasena, if you have never seen the Buddha, and if your teachers have never seen the Buddha, well then, revered Nagasena, there is no Buddha; the Buddha is not manifested here.”

“But, sire, did those former noble warriors exist who were the forerunners of your noble warrior dynasty?”

“Yes, revered sir; what doubt is there?”

“Have you, sire, ever seen the former noble warriors?”

“No, revered sir.”

“But have those who have instructed you, sire — priests, generals, judges, chief councilors — have these ever seen the former noble warriors?”

Translator Isaline B. Horner

“No, revered sir.”

“But if you, sire, have not seen the former noble warriors and if your instructors have not seen the former noble warriors, where are the former noble warriors?”

“Revered Nagasena, articles of use enjoyed by the former noble warriors are to be seen, that is to say, the white sunshade, the turban, the shoes, the yak-tail fan, the treasure of the sword of state, and the couches of great price. By these we can know and can believe that the former noble warriors existed.”

“Even so, sire, we may also know and believe in this Blessed One. There is this reason according to which we may know and believe that there was this Blessed One. What is the reason? There are, sire, articles of use enjoyed by that Blessed One who knows and sees, the Arhat, the Perfectly Enlightened One, that is to say, the [37 Requisites of Enlightenment]:

1. Four Foundations of Mindfulness
2. Four Right Efforts
3. Four Bases of Psychic Power
4. Five Spiritual Faculties
5. Five Powers
6. Seven Factors of Enlightenment
7. Noble Eightfold Path [1].

By these the world with its devas knows and believes that there was this Blessed One. For this reason, sire, for this cause, because of this methodical reasoning, because of this inference it should be known that there was this Blessed One.”

“Revered Nagasena, make a simile.”

The Blessed One, Gandhara, Central Asia

“As sire, a city-architect, when he wants to build a city, first looks about for a district that is level, not elevated, not low-lying, free from gravel and stone, secure, irreproachable and delightful, and then when he has made level there what was not level and has had it cleared of stumps of trees and thorns, he might build a city there. It would be fine and regular, well planned, the moats and encircling walls dug deep, the city gates, the watch-towers and the ramparts strong, the crossroads, squares, junctions and the places where three or four roads meet numerous, the main-roads clean, level and even, the bazaar shops well laid out, the city full of parks, pleasances, lakes, lotus pools and wells, adorned with a wide variety of shrines to devas, the whole free from defects. When that city was fully developed, he might go away to another district. Then after a time that city might become rich and prosperous, well stocked with food, secure, successful, happy, without adversity, without accident, crowded with all kinds of people. When these people had seen the city, new, well laid out, without a defect, irreproachable, delightful, they would know by inference: ‘Clever indeed is that city-architect who was the builder of the city.’

“Even so, sire, that Blessed One is without an equal, equal to the unequaled, equal to the matchless ones, unique, incomparable, boundless, immeasurable, of unmeasured special qualities, attained to perfection in special qualities, of infinite steadfastness, infinite incandescence, infinite energy, infinite power, gone to perfection in the powers of a Buddha; having overthrown Mara and his army, burst asunder the net of false views, made ignorance to be cast out and knowledge arise, borne aloft the torch of Dharma; and having attained omniscience, unvanquished and victorious in the battle, he built the City of Dharma.

“In the Blessed One’s City of Dharma the encircling walls are virtue, the moats are conscience, the ramparts over the city gates are knowledge, the watch-towers are energy, the pillars are confidence (conviction), the doorkeepers are mindfulness, the cross roads are the sutras, the places where three or four roads meet is the Higher Doctrine (Abhidhamma), the law-court is the Monastic Discipline (Vinaya), the streetway is the foundations of mindfulness. And in that streetway of the foundations of mindfulness such shops as these are offering goods for sale, that is to say, a flower shop, a perfume shop, a fruit shop, an antidote shop, a medicine shop, a nectar shop, a jewel shop, and a general shop.”

“Revered Nagasena, what is the flower shop of the Buddha, the Blessed One?”

Ancient Buddhist Scrolls from Gandhara (Salomon)

“There are, sire, certain kinds of objective supports for meditation that have been pointed out by that Blessed One who knows and sees, the Arhat, the Perfectly Enlightened One, that is to say, the perception of impermanence, the perception of non-self [the impersonal nature of all things], the perception of the foul, the perception of peril, the perception of abandonment, the perception of dispassion, the perception of cessation, the perception of not delighting in anything in the world, the perception of the impermanence of all formations, mindfulness of breathing; the [sobering] perception of a swollen corpse, the perception of a discolored corpse, the perception of a decomposing corpse, the perception of an oozing corpse, the perception of a corpse gnawed by animals, the perception of a corpse with bones scattered, the perception of a corpse hacked up and scattered, the perception of a corpse still bleeding, the perception of a worm-infested corpse, the perception of a skeleton; the perception of loving-kindness, the perception of compassion, the perception of sympathetic joy, the perception of equanimity; mindfulness of death; mindfulness occupied with the body [2].

“Whoever is anxious to get free from old age and death chooses one of these objective supports for meditation and, with this objective support for meditation, one is freed from lust, freed from hatred, freed from delusion, freed from pride, freed from wrong views; one crosses over samsara [the endless round of rebirth], stems the stream of craving, cleanses away the threefold stain; and when one has abandoned all the defilements and has entered the City of Nirvana that is stainless, dustless, pure, fair, birthless, ageless, deathless, blissful, cooled, and without fear, one sets free one's mind in arhatship [full enlightenment]. This sire, is called the Blessed One’s flower shop.”

“Revered Nagasena, what is the perfume shop of the Buddha, the Blessed One?”

“There are, sire, certain kinds of virtue that have been pointed out by that Blessed One. Anointed with the perfume of this virtue, the Blessed One’s offspring make fragrant and pervade the world with the devas with the perfume of virtue, and they breathe it forth and fill the quarters and the intermediate points and the following winds and the head-winds with it, and when they have suffused the world, they stand firm. And what, sire, are these various kinds of virtue? The morality of going for guidance (sarana), the Five Precepts, the Eight Precepts, and the Ten Precepts, the morality of restraint by the Path to Freedom (Patimokkha) as included in the Five Recitations [3]. This, sire, is called the Blessed One’s perfume shop.”

“Revered Nagasena, what is the fruit shop of the Buddha, the Blessed One?”

“Fruits, sire, have been pointed out by the Blessed One, that is to say, the fruit of stream-entry, the fruit of once-returning, the fruit of nonreturning, the fruit of arhatship, the attainment of the fruit of emptiness, the attainment of the fruit of the signless, the attainment of the fruit of the undirected [4]. Whatever fruit anyone wishes for, one, giving the price of the transaction, buys the fruit one prefers.”

“Revered Nagasena, what is the antidote shop of the Buddha, the Blessed One?”

“Antidotes, sire, have been pointed out by the Blessed One. By means of these antidotes the Blessed One sets free the world with the devas from the poison of the defilements. And what are these antidotes? These Four Noble Truths have been pointed out by the Blessed One, sire, that is to say, the

1. noble truth of suffering [disappointment, unsatisfactoriness],
2. the noble truth of the arising of suffering,
3. the noble truth of the cessation of suffering,
4. the noble truth of the way leading to the cessation of suffering.

Those who therein are longing for profound knowledge and hear the Dharma of the Four [Ennobling] Truths, they are set free from rebirth, aging, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair. This sire, is called the Blessed One’s antidote shop.”

“Revered Nagasena, what is the medicine shop of the Buddha, the Blessed One?”

“Medicines, sire, have been pointed out by the Blessed One. By means of these medicines the Blessed One cures devas and humans, that is to say, the

• Four Foundations of Mindfulness
• Four Right Efforts
• Four Bases of Psychic Power
• Five Spiritual Faculties
• Five Powers
• Seven Factors of Enlightenment
• Noble Eightfold Path.

By means of these medicines the Blessed One purges people of wrong views, of wrong aspiration, of wrong speech, of wrong action, of wrong mode of livelihood, of wrong endeavor, of wrong mindfulness, and of wrong concentration; he has an emetic given for the vomiting up of lust, hatred, delusion, pride, false view, doubt, agitation, lethargy and drowsiness, shamelessness and lack of fear of wrongdoing; he has an emetic for the vomiting up of all the defilements. This, sire, is called the Blessed One’s medicine shop.”

“Revered Nagasena, what is the nectar shop of the Buddha, the Blessed One?” More

Mahayana: Vasubandhu's Abhidharma-kosa

K.R. Paramahamsa, The Red Carpet Broadcast (TRCB.com)

1,000-armed Goddess of Compassion, Kwan Yin, Capital Museum, Beijing (Sftrajan/Flickr.com)

  

The Abhidharma-kosa ("Treasury of the Higher Teachings") of Vasubandhu helps orient readers to a Buddhist view of the path to liberation.

 
The Abhidharma-kosa is organized into nine chapters. The first two set forth the factors organized under categories like aggregates, sense bases, and elements.

  

These factors are distinguished as pure and impure, conditioned and unconditioned, and so on. The work lists about 75 factors that have come to be thought of as the definitive Abhidharma ("Higher Teaching") account relating to Dharma.

  

The intention of the entire work is fixed on the proclivities. The basic six ones are considered to be:

1. attachment (raga)
2. aversion or repugnance (dvesa, pratigha)
3. pride (mana)
4. ignorance (avidya)
5. wrong view (drsti)
6. perplexity (vicikitsa).

By relating these proclivities to varied defilements, contaminants [taints], floods, bonds, afflictions and envelopers, Vasubandhu develops a highly complex analysis in Chapter 5.

• Tibetan interpretations of the concentrations (jhanas)
• Vasubandhu's Critique of the Soul (metaphysics) 

Collet Cox relates the problems that arise when trying to abandon the proclivities, which relate to different sources of bondage such as defilements thus:
  

Within post-Vibhasa Sarvastivadin Abhidharma texts, categories of defilements come to be differentiated according to their functions, which in turn become the subject of heated sectarian controversy.
  
This controversy reflects the further refinement of theories concerning the operation of thought and proclivities as well as the methods by which proclivities are to be abandoned. It is also interconnected with the development of more sophisticated ontological theories, which affected all aspects of Abhidharma doctrine.

  

In particular, this controversy involves the possibility of a distinction between latent and active proclivities and the relation between them and the thought processes of the individual life-stream they characterize.

  

At issue is the development of a model that could successfully explain the apparent, persistent activity of certain proclivities, the reemergence of their activity after an interruption, and the mechanism by which they are to be abandoned. For example, can un-virtuous proclivities arise conditioned by a virtuous factor?

   

If not, then what is the causal mechanism by which defilements arise immediately after a virtuous moment of thought? Further, if defilements are associated with thought, since two associated thought-concomitants of differing moral quality cannot occur simultaneously, how can the virtuous counter agent that obstructs a particular proclivity arise simultaneously with it?

  

If, however, proclivities are not understood to be associated with thought, their very activity of defiling thought is meaningless, and no abandonment is necessary. Finally, if proclivities are understood to exist as real entities in the past and future as well as in the present, then they can never be destroyed in the sense that they become nonexistent, so in what sense can they be said to be abandoned?
   
Vasubandhu and Samghabhadra attempt to... More

BBQ Day: Buddhism & Vegetarianism

Soul Curry Magazine (2008), Wisdom Quarterly update (Memorial Day, 2011)

In Buddhism, views on vegetarianism vary from school to school. In the schools of the Theravada and Vajrayana, the act of eating meat is not always prohibited; the larger Mahayana school recommends a vegetarian diet.

This recommendation is based on the firm insistence by the Buddha, in certain Mahayana sutras, that his followers should not eat meat or fish. [Eating often entails that someone kill, which is always condemned as harmful and bearing unwelcome results for all involved when such deeds ripen and their result is met with, which is often quite some time later.]



Interestingly, the accepted legend of the Buddha’s premature passing says that he became sick after accepting an offering of tainted meat from his host Cunda the Blacksmith while traveling. (Some say pork possibly infected with trichinosis although -- as Wisdom Quarterly has gone to pains to clarify -- it was more likely food delightful to pigs, namely, tender but poisonous mushrooms).

Buddha with chief male disciples in Borobudur, Java, Indonesia on Vesak 2011 or 2555 Buddhist Era (PWBaker/Flickr).

The meaning of the relevant word to describe this tainted "food" is however contested: Mamsa is not the usual term for meat. The food was sukara-maddava, which translates as "pig’s delight" and has been interpreted as meaning a kind of truffle, or mushroom delicacy, favored by pigs.

There is a divergence of views within Buddhism as to whether vegetarianism is necessary, with some schools of Buddhism rejecting it as an absolute requirement.

The first precept in Buddhism is usually translated as: I undertake the precept to refrain from taking life. Some Buddhists see this as implying that Buddhists should not eat meat (which almost always entails someone taking the life of a living being for the purpose of someone eating it, except in the case of eating roadkill or old animals that die of natural causes). Others argue that this is not necessarily the case.

Some Buddhists strongly oppose meat-eating on the basis of implicit scriptural injunctions against flesh-eating, issuing from the Buddha himself.

"Vegan" means not using any animal products and, done correctly, is the cleanest and healthiest diet of all.

In the Sukhamala Sutra (AN 3.38), the Buddha describes his family as being wealthy enough to provide non-vegetarian meals even to the servants. After becoming the Buddha, he accepted any food offered with respect as alms, including meat, which in India was very unlikely to be offered to a spiritual seeker.

But there is no reference to him ever eating meat during his seven years as an ascetic striving for enlightenment.

On one occasion, according to the texts, a general sent a servant to purchase meat specifically to offer it as a meal for the Buddha. The Buddha declined, declaring that meat should not be eaten under three circumstances:

• when one has (1) seen, (2) heard, or (3) suspects that a living being was purposely slaughtered for one to eat, it is not to be eaten. [To eat such flesh, some explain, would be to condone or implicitly approve of killing.]
  

[The Buddha:] "Jivaka, these are the three circumstances in which meat should not be eaten. Jivaka, I declare there are three circumstances in which meat can be eaten: when it is not seen or heard or suspected that a living being has been purposely slaughtered for one to eat."

This was laid down as an explicit rule for monastics. The question is, Who are animals in supermarkets killed for? They are killed for the purchaser/consumer, and that is not determined until one buys or consumes the slaughtered and butchered flesh.

But many lay Buddhists, particularly in the Theravada tradition, argue: "Those animals are not killed for anyone. They're just being killed. They're just there. I come by and I buy them." For whom are animals killed the next day, for certainly the butcher would stop killing if no one bought the flesh? When one person hires another person to kill someone (an animal in this case), two are guilty of one murder -- and the one who hired the other is more guilty than the killer.

Valuing life, wise and agnostic Einstein was a vegetarian.

In this particular sutra, the Buddha instructs a monk or nun to accept, without any discrimination, whatever food is offered as alms with goodwill, including meat. One would not, however, consume it.

In the Vanijja Sutra, the Buddha declares that the meat trade (ranching, butchering, dealing in meat) is a wrong means of livelihood: "Monks, lay followers should not engage in five types of business: (1) trade in weapons, (2) trade in human beings, (3) trade in meat, (4) trade in intoxicants, or (5) trade in poisons [such as pesticides]. These are the five types of business that a lay follower should not engage in."

In the Nirvana sutra, a Mahayana scripture purporting to give the Buddha’s final teachings, he insists that his followers should not eat any kind of meat or fish. Even vegetarian food that has touched meat should be washed before being eaten. Also it is not permissible for a Buddhist monastic to pick out the non-meat portions of a meal and leave the rest; the whole meat-tainted meal must be rejected.

Eating meat versus killing

Life is destroyed when farmers plough the ground or when food or, during cooking, when insects are caught in the fire. Consequently, some ascetic Jain sources advocate avoidance of activities that are seen to have a more direct connection to killing, including all farming and eating of food, meat, and root vegetables, which results in indirect destruction of animal and plant life. Some "enlightened" Jain monastics, most of whom are nuns, go so far as to practice "self-termination" by self-starvation.

But in Buddhism, it is recognized that existence, by nature, is the cause of direct or indirect suffering and death (samsara). One should certainly avoid gluttony and greedy consumption, which harms oneself and others, while maintaining the healthiest diet and lifestyle possible.

What is most important is leading a life conducive to attaining enlightenment or making the most good karma, which benefits one for a long, long time in the course of endless rebirths.

In the Pali canon, which all Buddhist schools generally consider to be authentic, the Buddha, when asked, refused to institute vegetarianism as an absolute monastic code. [He refused because it was proposed by a scandalous monk, Devadatta (the Buddhist Judas figure), seeking to create a schism in the monastic community by claiming greater purity than the Buddha offered. The Buddha may have had another motive to reject such a strict injunction: His followers would have already known that meat-eating is not wholesome or healthy or generally practiced by spiritual seekers, and to have prohibited would have limited the universal appeal of the Dharma, which is about a lot more than diet.]

Mahayana Buddhism argues that if one pursues the path of the bodhisattva [someone vowing to become a buddha rather than an arhat], one should avoid meat-eating to cultivate compassion for all living beings who suffer and out of compassion for one's own health.

Similarly, in the older Theravada Buddhist school, avoiding meat-eating for the purpose of cultivation of loving-kindness (metta) is also seen to be in accord with the Buddha-Dharma.

In most Buddhist schools, one may adopt vegetarianism if one wishes, but it is never considered appropriate to attack or berate someone else for eating meat.

In Chinese Mahayana, vegetarianism is seen as a prerequisite for pursuing the grand path of the bodhisattva. In this case, one is not simply intent on gaining enlightenment and liberation but on making sure others are freed.

This means one must first become a buddha to actually help "save" them. But long before one helps save them in an ultimate sense (by reaching enlightenment and nirvana), one can help by easing their suffering.

The case for vegetarianism is made more forcefully, often to the extent of accusing those who willfully or carelessly eat meat as lacking compassion.

Chinese Mahayanists do not accept the Pali sutras as definitive when they conflict with later Mahayana sutras [which were not the work of the historical Buddha but people]. Consequently, some do not accept that Gautama Buddha ever ate meat or permitted eating it. This is in accordance with the famous Mahayana Lankavatara sutra.

In the Pali canon, however, the Buddha declared that monastics living on alms accepting meat without preference and without asking or hinting that they want it is karma neutral for them. It is not karma neutral for those who kill or offer animal flesh they paid someone else to kill.

Shakyamuni Buddha Tibetan-style (wn.com)

As stated, the Buddha explicitly refused to institute vegetarianism in the monastic order. Theravada commentaries explain that the Buddha was making a distinction between the direct destruction of life and eating of already dead meat. Moreover, they point out that cultivation of vegetables also involves proxy killing.

In fact, any act of buying or consuming can be to some extent a cause of some degree of proxy killing [as when a henchman-butcher kills because a Godfather pays him to. One does not kill directly but pays a butcher to kill, and both take on unprofitable karma as a result. When it comes to fruition, which may be in that life, the next life, or in any future life even thousands of years later, both suffer severely. So it is said one should neither kill nor encourage others to kill, neither break the Five Precepts nor encourage anyone to break them].

The Buddha advised his followers to avoid gluttony [a kind of kamesu-micchacara or harmful indulgence of the senses epitomized by sexual misconduct], or any other act of craving which leads to over consumption and harm to others. Meat-eating is a terrible thing for environmental reasons that go beyond the murder of animals and the ruin of ranchers, butchers, and flesh traders.

Certain Mahayana sutras do present the Buddha as very vigorously and unreservedly denouncing the eating of meat, mainly on the grounds that such an act is linked to the spreading of fear among sentient beings. (Allegedly, living animals and spirits sense the odor of death that lingers about the meat-eater and consequently fear for their own lives. Flesh-eating is a common practice of ogres or yakkhas, starving scavenger ghosts or pretas, nagas or cruel reptilians, not humans). Eating flesh violates the bodhisattva’s fundamental vow to cultivate universal compassion.

Moreover according to the Buddha, in the Angulimaliya Sutra, since all beings share the same dhatu (elemental, spiritual principle, or essence) and are intimately related to one another, killing and eating other sentient creatures is tantamount to a form of self-killing and cannibalism.

The [Mahayana] sutras which inveigh against meat-eating include the Nirvana sutra, the Shurangama sutra, the Brahmajala sutra, the Angulimaliya sutra, the Mahamegha sutra, and the Lankavatara sutra, as well as the Buddha’s comments on the negative karmic effects of meat consumption in the Karma sutra.

In the Mahayana version of the "Great Nirvana discourse" (Mahaparinirvana sutra), which presents itself as the final elucidating and definitive Mahayana teachings of the Buddha on the very eve of his final passing. There the Buddha states that "the eating of meat extinguishes the seed of great kindness," adding that all and every kind of meat and fish consumption (even of animals found already dead of natural causes) is prohibited by him.

He specifically rejects the idea that monastics who go out for alms and receive meat as charity from a donor should eat it: “it should be rejected... I say that even meat, fish, wild game, dried hooves, and scraps of meat left over by others constitutes an infraction... I teach the harm arising from meat-eating.”

The Buddha also predicts in this sutra that later monastics will "hold spurious writings to be the authentic Dharma" and will concoct their own sutras and falsely claim that the Buddha allows the eating of meat, but he does not.

A long passage in the Lankavatara sutra shows the Buddha speaking out very forcefully against meat consumption, unequivocally in favor of vegetarianism, since the eating of the flesh of fellow sentient beings is said by him to be incompatible with the compassion that a bodhisattva should be striving to cultivate.

In several other Mahayana scriptures (e.g., the Mahayana Rebirth Tale or Jatakas), the Buddha is seen clearly to indicate that meat-eating is undesirable and karmically unwholesome.

In Tibetan Buddhism, a strong emphasis was placed on the number of esoteric sutras that were transmitted from Northern India. In these sutras, it is clearly stated that the practice of Vajrayana [Tibetan Mahayana, the lightning vehicle] would make vegetarianism unnecessary.

A number of tantric texts frequently recommend alcohol and meat, though not all take such passages literally. Many traditions of the Ganachakra, which is a type of Pancha-makara Puja [Five M's Ritual: meat is mas, fish is matsaya, wine is mada, sex is matihun, and shunning bad company is mudra] prescribe the offering and ingestion of meat and alcohol.

Buddhist views today
In the modern world, attitudes toward vegetarianism vary by location. In Theravada countries of Southeast Asia and the island of Sri Lanka, monastics are allowed by the Disciplinary Rules (vinaya) to accept almost any food that is offered to them including cooked meat -- unless they suspect that animal corpse was slaughtered specifically for them. (There are prohibited animals, such as tigers and bears and elephants, and prohibitions against accepting uncooked foods, along with other minor rules that are interpreted differently).

In China, Korea, and Vietnam, monastics are expected to give up meat-eating. In Taiwan, Buddhist monks, nuns, and most lay followers eat no animal products or fetid (strong smelling) vegetables -- traditionally garlic, asafoetida, shallots, leeks, and mountain onions -- although in modern times this rule is often interpreted to include other vegetables of the onion genus as well as coriander.

This is called Su vegetarianism. In Japan, some clergy practice vegetarianism, and most will do so at least when training at a monastery. But otherwise they typically do eat meat. In Tibet, where vegetables have historically been very scarce, the adopted Disciplinary Rules come from the defunct Sarvastivada school, vegetarianism is very rare.

But the Dalai Lama and other esteemed lamas invite their audiences to adopt vegetarianism when they can. Chatral Rinpoche in particular has stated that anyone who wishes to be his student must be vegetarian.

In the end, what can be collectively said is that it should be left to the sensibilities, aesthetics, environment, and thinking of the individual. Karma means one is responsible for one's own actions and choices. So readers should use their own conscience as a guide and do what they wish to do.

The attempt of SoulCurryMagazine.com and Wisdom Quarterly is to provide information in general and specifically from a Buddhist perspective.

Why is Mahayana Buddhism so popular?

Mahayana Buddhism: How did it achieve such popularity?

Rit Nosotro (comparative essay from a predominantly Christian perspective)

Given the established Asian religions and/or philosophies of Taoism, Confucianism, and Shintoism, why did Mahayana Buddhism gain such popularity?

The Force, Nature, Master Kong, the Sun Goddess, and Buddha – each of these play their respective roles in the Eastern religions of Taoism, Confucianism, Shintoism, and Mahayana Buddhism. However, Mahayana Buddhism has surpassed all in its ability to weave its way into Western [Judeo-Christian] culture, in particular. Why is this true?

The answer may be had by examining Mahayana Buddhism in contrast with basic beliefs in other religions including those of evangelical Christianity. Wherever nominal Christians turn from the truth [sic.] to New Age mythology, Mahayana Buddhism is a popular belief system that tickles their itching ears.

Mahayana vs. Hinayana Buddhism
All forms of Buddhism, including Mahayana, believe in meditation and concentration, the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Noble Path, the impermanence of all phenomena [anicca], dependent causation, and the nonexistence of an essential self [anatta]. Yet, Buddhism has two major branches.

“From Mahayana sources, it seems that the major point of difference was that the now defunct Lesser Vehicle [Hinayana or Sarvastivada now mistakenly equated with the ancient Theravada tradition] sought salvation through individual effort, whereas Mahayana advocated salvation for all beings through the worship and grace of the Buddha or buddhas (“enlightened ones”) and bodhisattvas ([beings who vow to become buddhas) Buddhist-saviors, whose ‘essence is enlightenment’),” Royal W. Weiler stated.

However, in practical terms, even the historical Buddha is overshadowed by the bodhisattvas, who are people who vow that they will forgo or delay their final enlightenment until all creatures are “saved” (Ref. 1, Ref. 2 “Mahayana” Encyclopedia Americana, “Buddha and Buddhism” Encyclopedia Americana).

Another split between Hinayana (Lesser Vehicle) and Mahayana (Greater Vehicle) Buddhism is the Hinayana belief that Buddha was just human. They believe that when he died [parinirvana is the opposite of death since "death" is almost inseparably involved with rebirth] he ceased to exist. [This is, of course, a great distortion since that which does not exist cannot then cease to exist; what is true to say is that he broke the cycle of rebirth and escaped Samsara].

Mahayana, however, believes that Buddha did not die, but merely transformed himself into another body. [This would seem to say that the Buddha did not attain nirvana or that, as is more commonly suggested, "Nirvana is Samsara."] That’s where Mahayana developed [or invented] the idea of the Trikaya or “The Three Bodies” which Buddha uses.

Another difference is that the standards to achieve nirvana (a lack of desire and feelings) [nirvana -- the "end of all suffering" --is in fact marked by the absence of craving and the presence of an exquisite, ineffable feeling of bliss] was lowered in Mahayana Buddhism. Mahayana lowered the standard two notches from the previous Hinayana standard so that more people could be “saved” by achieving nirvana.

By reducing the standard, it increased the possibility of the masses achieving the goal(Ref. 3, Ref. 4)... and so on with many common distortions being repeated and given new life.

• Original, uncorrected essay

NOTE: Who is Rit Nosotro [pseudonym "writ by us"?], and how does one cite "his" essays? All material on this site (hyperhistory.net) is under constant revision. Essays continue to be donated by students and other authors which become property of hyperhistory.net. Emails to the servant at hyperhistory.net often contain constructive comments about the published material. These are used to supplement, clarify, and delete as evidence demands. Hyperhistory.net is a global community effort. Thus, essays do not use the first person nor are they written from a uniquely American perspective. In order to reflect the collective authorship of the dynamic content contained on Hyperhistory.net, the pseudonym of "Rit Nosotro" has been devised. (Writ is an archaic past tense of "written" and Nosotros is the plural pronoun for "us" in Spanish.) The authorship is "written by us." [So the WQ deduction was correct.] This does not mean "public domain." Unless otherwise stated, these are anonymous contributions over which hyperhistory.net controls all copyright. For example, this page might be cited in a bibliography in the following manner: Nosotro, Rit. How to cite material from hyperhistory.net. 27 Oct. 2003. (Date of access: Oct. 27, 2009). It has been available for six years exactly without being corrected. Published in the hopes that these revisions help (WQ).

Is "Mahayana" a Different Religion?

Originally in Life Magazine (WQ update)

PHOTOS: 1. Mahayana "god" Amitabha in heaven (thezenfrog blog); 2. (yogilin.net); dogged Zen devotion (missfidget.com); iconic Japanese Buddha; mother goddess Western and Eastern form, Mariam and Kwan Yin.

From early times the type of Buddhism practiced in China and eventually in Japan (Zen) and Tibet (Lamaism) differed from the earlier practices of South and Southeast Asian Buddhists.

The difference was due to some extent to variations in national temperament. But it can be traced back to about 200 years after Gautama's passing, when a group of disciples disagreed on the interpretation of the Teaching and preached instead a doctrine that was less rigorous and more easily adapted to the needs of ordinary people.

This new, easier doctrine became known as Mahayana ("greater vehicle"). And its members disdainfully referred to the orthodox, original form of Buddhism as Hinayana ("lesser vehicle").

Shakyamuni (Siddhartha Gautama), who became the historical Buddha (or "fully enlightened teacher"), taught a Path to individual emancipation from continuous-rebirth (Samsara) and suffering (dukkha).

Mahayana, like Christianity, developed a messianic message of a savior who would provide for the "salvation" of others (variously: Maitreya, the prophesied future-buddha; Amitabha, a buddha in a heaven known as the Western Paradise; or any number of bodhisattvas). This salvation would not be into nirvana (the complete freedom from all further suffering) but into a "pure land" (heavenly abode) or simply more and improved rebirths.

So vast was the difference between original Buddhist doctrines and popular Mahayana innovations that it constituted almost a different religion. Some say it was a vastly different new religion with a Buddhist appearance and substantively Hindu doctrines.

Some go so far as to say that Mahayana is simply "Chinese Christianity" since the similarities are so striking and in line with the Buddhism Jesus was exposed to in India. (See previous entries on the Lost Years of Jesus).

Mahayana Buddhism, matured mainly in the free religious atmosphere of Tang Dynasty China, sought a way to make Buddhism a religion of the masses. It found the ascetic life of India and Southeast Asia too austere and demanding for ordinary people. And it searched for a method by which enlightenment might be achieved more simply than the historical Buddha had taught.

Whereas the new ideal of Mahayana was a saintly would-be savior figure known as a bodhisattva who vows to forego enlightenment and emancipation until he or she saves all other beings, the ideal Buddhist of the Hinayana was the arhat.

(Hinayana technically refers to sects like the Sarvastivada school that no longer exist but are somewhat close in character to the oldest surviving Buddhist tradition, the Theravada, or "Teaching of the Enlightened Elders," the Theras being the immediate disciples of the historical Buddha).

An arhat is a meditator who realizes enlightenment in this very life. But the bodhisattva-ideal of the Mahayana school became someone still stuck in Samsara. This became acceptable with the counter-intuitive leap in logic that Nirvana is Samsara, that is, the old Hindu idea that liberation is here now for immediate realization within suffering and rebirth. Bodhisattvas (which faithful Mahayana practitioners vow to be) elect to remain unenlightened (or at least not fully-enlightened, which would entail emancipation).

Thus, they do not achieve the liberating goal of Buddhism, at least as taught by the historical Buddha, which was always nirvana. That is, they will not accept freedom until everyone else achieves the goal. The belief is that this is what perfectly enlightened teachers (samma-sam-buddhas) do, in spite of the fact that the historical Buddha established the Teaching and was emancipated from rebirth.

Since meditation and even temporary asceticism are thought too demanding for the average person, Mahayana teaches that faith and devotion are enough. Salvation-by-faith (as in Christian and Hindu worship [bhakti]) became one of Mahayana's basic tenets. And the serene meditative example of Gautama was superseded by a glorious redeemer, a god known as the Amitabha Buddha or "Buddha of Infinite Light," to whom the prayers of the faithful were addressed.

Unlike the Buddha, Amitabha was not an actual historical person. So the dominant virtue changed from an emphasis on detached wisdom to engaged compassion, which further popularized the new Mahayana religion. Now that it had a Jesus/Jehovah figure, it adopted a Madonna or Mary (Hebrew "Miriam") in the form of a human mother goddess -- the embodiment of compassion and mercy -- Kwan Yin.