why doesnt Theravada recognise Amitabha Buddha & other Pusa

• Louis dave36

  2 Sep 09, 22:03

  I am just perplexed that why doesnt the Theravada tradition recognise Amitabha Buddha & other Bodhisattvas like Manjusri and Kuan Shi Yin?

   

  since it is uttered and expounded by the Buddha, then why doesnt their tradition recognise?

• An Eternal Now

  2 Sep 09, 23:25

  Theravada and Mahayana have different canon.

• Louis dave36

  3 Sep 09, 01:00

  Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

  Theravada and Mahayana have different canon.

  Mahayana was setup after the second council isnt it, much later than the Theravada tradition.

   

  I feel that if it was uttered and expounded by the Buddha, it should be recognised unless it is not.

   

• Wongsanz

  3 Sep 09, 01:09

  interesting.... what's the reasons they don't recognise?

• JitKiat

  3 Sep 09, 11:04

  This has been extensively discussed in the academic circle i.e. whether Mahayana is uttered and expounded by the Buddha himself. I have read about Master Sheng Yen & Yin Shun's opinions in this and would like to highlight some important points:

  References

  http://www.longquanzs.org/articledetail.php?id=5139

  http://www.yinshun.org.tw/books/41/yinshun41-56.html

  Master Sheng Yen: ä½› 教主张“ä¾�法ä¸�ä¾�人”的精神。佛教相信：é�žä½›è¯´çš„未必就ä¸�是佛法（如弟å­�等说的），佛法也未必全由佛的å�£èˆŒæ�¥è¯´ï¼ˆå¦‚佛的放光ã€�神å�˜ã€�举手ã€�投足ã€�看护病人 等）。因此，佛的生活ã€�佛的言教，以å�Šç»�过了佛所å�°å�¯çš„弟å­�们的对è¯�，也都æˆ�了佛法，这在律部å�Šé˜¿å�«éƒ¨ä¸­ï¼Œéš�处å�¯ä»¥è§�到

  Master Yin Shun:

  「��法相，是�佛說�，本於「佛語具三相�，是�集『阿�經�所�的準繩。如『�實論）�一（大正三二‧二四三下）說：

  「是法根本，皆從佛出。是諸���天神等，皆傳佛語。如比[毘]尼中說：佛法�佛所說， 弟�所說，變化所說，諸天所說。��言之，一切世間所有善語，皆是佛說�。

  『�實論�是一部容�大乘的��論典。從『阿���『毘尼�所見，有佛說的，有（�� ）弟�們說的，有諸天說的，也有化人說的。但「���天神等皆傳佛語�，他們�是傳述佛所 說的，所以概括的說，一切都是佛說。『�實論�的見解，與大乘經的見解一致，如『��般若 波羅蜜經��一（大正八‧五三七中）說：

  「佛諸弟�敢有所說，皆是佛力。所以者何？佛所說法，於中學者，能證諸法相[性]；證已 ，有所言說，皆與法相�相�背，以法相力故�。

  弟å­�們所說的法，ä¸�是自己說的，是ä¾�於佛力──ä¾�佛的加æŒ�而說。æ„�æ€�說，佛說法，弟å­� 們照著去修證，悟到的法性，與佛沒有差別，所以說是佛力（這是佛加æŒ�說的原始æ„�義）。é¾�樹 Nagarjuna解說為：「我等當承佛å¨�神為眾人說，譬如傳語人。……我等所說，å�³æ˜¯ä½›èªªã€�。弟å­�們說法，ä¸�é�•ä½›èªªï¼Œå¾žä½›çš„æ ¹æº�而來，所以是佛說。這譬如從根發芽，長æˆ�了一株高大 的樹，æž�葉扶ç–�。果實çº�çº�，當然是花ã€�葉從æž�生，果實從花生，而歸根究底，一切都從根而出 生。ä¾�據這一見地，『諸法無行經ã€�說：「諸è�©è–©æœ‰æ‰€å¿µï¼Œæœ‰æ‰€èªªï¼Œæœ‰æ‰€æ€�惟，皆是佛之神力。  所以者何？一切諸法，皆從佛出ã€�。『文殊師利所說摩訶般若波羅蜜經ã€�說：「能如是諦了斯 義，如è�žè€Œèªªï¼Œç‚ºè«¸å¦‚來之所讚歎；ä¸�é�•æ³•ç›¸ï¼Œæ˜¯å�³ä½›èªªã€�。『海é¾�王經ã€�說：「是諸文字， 去來今佛所說。……以是之故，一切文字諸所言教，皆å��佛言ã€�。『發覺淨心經ã€�說：「所有 一切善言，皆是如來所說ã€�。所以ä¾�大乘經「佛說ã€�的見解，「大乘是佛說ã€�，ä¸�能說「是佛 法而ä¸�是佛說ã€�ï¼�

  ================================

  When it comes to Amitabha Buddha & Sukavathi. It was mentioned by Nagarjurna as an Easy Path. Subsequently, the small Amitabha sutra was translated by Kumarajiva and Xuan Zang. That means even the pureland teaching is recognized & certified to be valid by the 3 historical figures above.

• JitKiat

  3 Sep 09, 17:57

   

  金庸：是啊!中国的佛ç»�å�·å¸™æµ©ç¹�，有数万å�·ä¹‹å¤šï¼Œå�ªè¯»äº†å‡ æœ¬ç®€å�•çš„入门书，就觉得其中迷信与虚妄的æˆ�分太é‡�，ä¸�符å�ˆæˆ‘对真实世界的认识；但还是勉强读下去。å�Žæ�¥è¯»åˆ°ã€Šæ�‚阿å�«ç»�》ã€�《中阿å�«ç»�》ã€�《长阿å�«ç»�》，几个月之中废å¯�忘食ã€�苦苦研读，潜心æ€�索，çª�然之间有了会心：“真ç�†æ˜¯åœ¨è¿™é‡Œäº†ã€‚一定是这样。 ”ä¸�过中文佛ç»�太过艰深，在å�¤æ–‡çš„翻译中，有时一两个字有完全歧异的å�«ä¹‰ï¼Œå®žåœ¨æ— æ³•äº†è§£ã€‚　　于是我å�‘伦敦的巴利文学会订购了全套《原始佛ç»�》的英文译本。所谓“原始佛ç»�”，是指佛学研究者认为是最早期ã€�最接近释迦牟尼所说佛法的纪录，因为是从å�°åº¦å�—部ã€�锡兰一带传出去的，所以也称为“å�—ä¼ ä½›ç»�”。大乘佛学者和大乘宗派则贬称之为“å°�乘”ä½›ç»�。　　“原æ�¥å¦‚此，终于明白了”

   

  金庸：英文佛ç»�容易阅读得多。å�—ä¼ ä½›ç»�内容简明平实，和真实的人生å��分接近，åƒ�我这ç§�知识分å­�容易了解ã€�接å�—，由此而产生了信仰，相信佛陀(å�°åº¦è¯­æ–‡ä¸­åŽŸæ–‡æ„�义为“觉者”)的的确确是觉悟了人生的真实é�“ç�†ï¼Œä»–将这é�“ç�†(也å�³æ˜¯“佛法”)传给世人。我ç»�过长期的æ€�ç´¢ã€�查考ã€�质疑ã€�继续研学等等过程之å�Žï¼Œç»ˆäºŽè¯šå¿ƒè¯šæ„�ã€�全心全æ„�的接å�—。佛法解决了我心中的大疑问，我内心充满喜悦，欢喜ä¸�å°½——“原æ�¥å¦‚此，终于明白了ï¼�”从痛苦到欢喜，大约是一年å�Šæ—¶å…‰ã€‚

   

  金庸：éš�å�Žå†�研读å�„ç§�大乘佛ç»�，例如《维摩诘ç»�》ã€�《楞严ç»�》ã€�《般若ç»�》等等，疑问å�ˆäº§ç”Ÿäº†ã€‚这些佛ç»�的内容与“å�—ä¼ ä½›ç»�”是完全ä¸�å�Œçš„，充满了夸张神奇ã€�ä¸�å�¯æ€�议的å�™è¿°ï¼Œæˆ‘很难接å�—和信æœ�。直至读到《妙法莲å�Žç»�》，ç»�过长期æ€�考之å�Žï¼Œç»ˆäºŽäº†æ‚Ÿ——原æ�¥å¤§ä¹˜ç»�典主è¦�都是“妙法”，用巧妙的方法æ�¥å®£æ‰¬ä½›æ³•ï¼Œè§£é‡Šä½›æ³•ï¼Œä½¿å¾—智力较低ã€�悟性较差的人能够了解与接å�—。《法å�Žç»�》中，佛陀用ç�«å®…ã€�牛车ã€�大雨等等多ç§�浅近的比喻æ�¥å�‘世人解释佛法，为了令人相信，甚至说些谎è¯�(例如佛陀å�‡è£…中毒将死)也无ä¸�å�¯ï¼Œç›®çš„都是在弘扬佛法。

   
• Louis dave36

  4 Sep 09, 21:05

  some critics said that chanting to Amitabha Buddha is akin to like Christian's promise of heaven if accept Jesus.

• Weychin

  4 Sep 09, 22:09

  There was an old lady who used to look after the toilet next to my shop a few years ago. Before she passed on , apparently she knew she was going to go, she started to playt the Amitabha chants a few months before . For a person who has little education and spend most of lives trying to make ends meet. Would  you deny the only salvation available to them? Hopefully, when one passes on, one would be able hold  Amitabha  chant in their mind  . 

   

   

   

   

    .

   

• JitKiat

  5 Sep 09, 12:39

  Pureland is not as easy. It is unlike promise of heaven. There are different levels of faith/vow, as well as different levels of concentration in chanting Amitabha during the moment of death. Upon rebirth of pureland, there are also many different levels as a result.

   

  In Master Ou Yi's commentary of Amitabha sutra:

   

  Faith - faith in oneself, faith in sutra/Amitabha Buddha, faith in cause, faith in consequence, faith in arising of sukavathi, faith in non-duality (信自, 信他， 信因， 信果， 信事， ä¿¡ç�†ï¼‰

   

  Vow - Vow to leave the Saha World, Vow to be reborn in pureland. 厌离娑婆，欣求��

   

  Practise - whole-hearted chanting of Amitabha's name 一心�乱

   

  According to Master Ou Yi, whether to be reborn, depends on faith/vow ... how high the resultant level, depends on practise

   

  To go to heaven, there is no need to vow to leave Saha World.

   

  Imagine Sukavathi is at one radio frequency, we need to tune our thought at the same frequency to receive the signal. If our thought is tuned in to the Saha World channel ... how to be reborn?

• Blueraya

  7 Sep 09, 18:59

  The Buddha has first preached the Four Noble Truth and thus started the Thervanda Tradition and it was only later on, when the time is ripe for spreading Mahayana there are certain group were the suitable candidates. If i am not wrong it, it started from the preaching of the MahaPramitia Sutra, the Mahayana Tradition started. Each will emphiaise that they followed the complete teaching. But who is right, must use wisdom to discrimate.

  According to Je TsongKha asked Lord Manjushri, there are so many schools and different views of emptiness, whose thought must one depend in order to pervice the emptiness and gain Buddhahood. Manjushri replied that one must depend on the Nagarjuna's view the Middle Way (Mulamadhyamakakarika) in order to gain Full Enlightement.

• Weychin

  7 Sep 09, 19:41

  Theravada or Mahayana are vehicles, they all help deliver ! Difference lies in aspiration and skillful means.  Suitability of practice differs for each individual in his/her environment. Do not get too caught up in "dogma", it breeds morbidity. Mindfulness is required in either.     

   

• Blueraya

  8 Sep 09, 05:29

  U are right as Buddha spread different teachings and tailored according to the wisdom and the requirements of the different sentinet beings. like in a resturant, some like noodles, some like fried rice as their choice. but they serve the same purpose in fillng stomach and satisfying taste buds. Still Thervanda, Mahayana & Vajrayana has differences.

  Mahayana also imbue with Thervanda teachings as what is common like 4 noble truth, 12 dependent links and 37 branches of enlightenent etc. What Thervanda (Hinayana) doesn't have is the Bodhicitta or Bodhi Xin which is an important requirement to Door of Mahayana. Mahayana doesn't take up the pursing enlightenment for own sake like the Hinayana does

  Vajrayana has both Mahayana and Hinayana teaching, What Mahayana does not have is the 4 unccommon practise of Vajrayana. Viualise oneself as indifferent as Buddha deity.

  I am trying to mean that there is difference in speed upon the vehicle one choose to take up. this is an anology to one travelling is on bicycle, another on a car and another one on fighter jet.

• soul2soul

  8 Sep 09, 08:44

  Originally posted by Louis dave36:

  I am just perplexed that why doesnt the Theravada tradition recognise Amitabha Buddha & other Bodhisattvas like Manjusri and Kuan Shi Yin?

   

  since it is uttered and expounded by the Buddha, then why doesnt their tradition recognise?

  That's because Amitabha Buddha and all the boddhisattas are not found inside the Pali Cannon - as simple as that. The only Boddhisattas mentioned in the Pali Cannon are the Buddha himself (referring to himself before he attains Nibbana) and the future Buddha - Matteya who is believed to be in the Tusita heaven now.

• soul2soul

  8 Sep 09, 09:11

  Originally posted by Wongsanz:

  interesting.... what's the reasons they don't recognise?

• An Eternal Now

  8 Sep 09, 15:58

  Originally posted by soul2soul:

  That's because Amitabha Buddha and all the boddhisattas are not found inside the Pali Cannon - as simple as that. The only Boddhisattas mentioned in the Pali Cannon are the Buddha himself (referring to himself before he attains Nibbana) and the future Buddha - Matteya who is believed to be in the Tusita heaven now.

  That's right -- different canon, simple as that.

• Louis dave36

  17 Sep 09, 03:06

  so Theravada and Mahayan were created after the passing away of the Buddha wasn't it.

   

  is this considered as schism in the sangha, that Theravada and Mahayana were split up. This wasnt what the Buddha had in mind when he expounded the dhamma, because during his time, there were no theravada nor mahayana.

• soul2soul

  17 Sep 09, 09:25

  Originally posted by Louis dave36:

  so Theravada and Mahayan were created after the passing away of the Buddha wasn't it.

   

  is this considered as schism in the sangha, that Theravada and Mahayana were split up. This wasnt what the Buddha had in mind when he expounded the dhamma, because during his time, there were no theravada nor mahayana.

  There wasn't a "theravada" or "mahayana" during Buddha's time. There is only 1 dhamma.

• JitKiat

  17 Sep 09, 10:17

  Even during the Buddha's time, there are groupings within the Sangha, some prefer meditation away from crowd (Mahakasyapa), some prefer hearing the teaching of Buddha (Ananda), some focus on precepts. Although they have different inclinations, all of them can still achieve enlightenment and respect each other. Even today, we still see frequent happy meetings of different traditions of Buddhism. A wise buddhist  of a specific tradition will never attack or belittle another tradition.

   

   

• JitKiat

  17 Sep 09, 10:21

  本是�根生，相煎何太急

• Weychin

  17 Sep 09, 13:23

  Excerpt from Encyclopedia Brittanica{Buddha,  "Upon enlightenment, Buddha,knew what he understood is so profound it would difficult for others to fathom. The god Brahma  descended from his heaven and asked him to teach, pointing out that humans are at different levels of development, some would benefit from his teaching"}

  What I wish to point out is"humans are at different levels of development" , everybody have the potential of buddhahood,  however,you rise to your level of understanding, your own clinging,your comfort zone, your dogma created by your level of understanding,your definitions of "delusion". Why do I cling to my reality of delusion? As of yet I am unable see the absurdity of my delusions, worst still, I impose my views, for I "KNOW" it is right! 

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

• Rooney9

  21 Sep 09, 02:18

  the question I am going to ask is, are some sutras really expounded by the Buddha, after some 2500 years ago, when oral transmission was how buddhism transmitted some  500 years after the passing of the Buddha.

   

   

  how authentic was it said to be expounded by the Buddha himself?

• An Eternal Now

  21 Sep 09, 03:22

  There is no way to verify the authenticity of anything, as basically all sutras including the Pali suttas are only written down 500 years after Buddha's parinirvana.

  The Mahayana certainly believes that the Mahayana sutras are expounded by the Buddha.

• maggot

  21 Sep 09, 07:08

  Agama sutras are written after Buddha's parinirvana Where got a huge gap of 500 years? The first agama sutra by Buddha's disciples that was written immediately after Buddha's parinirvana seems to be lost...anyone got any news of it???
• Weychin

  21 Sep 09, 14:56

  From what I little I can understand from the mahayana point of view , the Buddha transcends time, therefore, the sermons are not in chronological sequence , it also be in a form of termas(?), to be release at a later time. Just like a recording, perhaps?!!  

• An Eternal Now

  21 Sep 09, 15:09

  Originally posted by maggot:

  Agama sutras are written after Buddha’s parinirvana

  Where got a huge gap of 500 years?

  The first agama sutra by Buddha’s disciples that was written immediately after Buddha’s parinirvana seems to be lost…anyone got any news of it???

  No you are mistaken. They are recited 3 weeks after parinirvana.

  But the Pali suttas are only written down 500 years after Buddha's parinirvana at Sri Lanka.