wonderful guest

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 7 May 1999 16:56:47 Debora A. Orf wrote:

>(well i *am* a moderator

 

Oh, nice to meet you !

>--so i asked myself and said 'Ok, be careful')

>

>Big question! i will give a go at the short answer.

>

>There are 3 yanas or paths of buddhist thought.

> Theravada takes its canon from the Paali

>sutras

>the second and third school are both of the yana called Mayahana, which

>means great vehicle

 

Thank you very much for explaining your path and

how it differs from the other (two).

 

It was a very lucid and informative explanation.

 

Thanks for taking the time and effort to write it.

>The main thingy of the Mahayana that is different from

>the Theravada is the bodhisattva vow.

>sentient beings are numberless, i vow to save them all,

>delusions are endless, i vow to cut through them all,

>teachings are infinite, i vow to learn them all,

>the Buddha-way is inconcievable, i vow to attain it.

 

Very beautiful !

 

I must admit I do feel a certain attraction towards

it, but it sounds a bit too much of rearguard action

and I had too much of that last time around.

>The rest is all how to make the bodhisattva vow happen for real. Part of

>the means of that is based on the Sutras, and on the more esoteric level,

>the Tantras.

>Basically, what is buddha nature? where does it reside? What made Buddha

>Buddha? And is everyone capable of that. Mahayana and Therevada both say

>yes, but Mahayana thinks that is because of motivation to save all beings.

>Theravada motivation is more to save oneself.

 

OK, this is where the greatest differences arise, I see.

>One is still kind and

>non-harming to others, but THerevada says "how can one drowning man save

another?"

 

That is a valid question.

>, which is why Mahayana/Tantrayana vows "until i reach

>enlightenment, i will take refuge..." etc. We acknowlege that point. Cant

>save others until you save yourself. Until then, tho, one can do lots of

>good by living a certain way, doing certain things. So thats why we take

>lots of vows for conduct etc.

 

OK, I see. That sounds reasonable. Thanks again for

explaining, you do it very well.

>K? it happens. i know a few things, perhaps, but if i could not tell them

>to you, would that bother you?

 

No.

 

K will provide the answers I need, it has answered

all of my questions I've had so far

and more that I didn't even know were there.

>i'll leave it there. There are lots of good

>systems that are more open in Advaita, vedanta etc.

 

Right.

>im on the cautious path in some regards.

 

Caution is always good.

>Hope that helps. the main thing i think i will say is Buddhism is aware of

>energy and what can happen, but like, its not the >point of the path.

 

Yes, another Buddhist pointed that out to me not too

long ago. I do see the point.

 

Again, thanks for taking the time and effort of

explaining, I know it's not the kind of thing

which is explained in a few quick sentences.

 

Best regards,

 

Amanda.

 

 

 

 

Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com

[Guest guest]

On Mon, 10 May 1999, Amanda Erhart wrote:

>

> >sentient beings are numberless, i vow to save them all,

> >delusions are endless, i vow to cut through them all,

> >teachings are infinite, i vow to learn them all,

> >the Buddha-way is inconcievable, i vow to attain it.

>

> Very beautiful !

>

> I must admit I do feel a certain attraction towards

> it, but it sounds a bit too much of rearguard action

> and I had too much of that last time around.

>

 

when i first heard this vow, i felt like everything in me stood on end. it

was something wonderful, and i had to do it . Cant tell if motivation

was compassion or just "Wow! that's cool!". Maybe a little of both .

 

IMO: there's little more cool thing to do than to live for others for

real. its like way hard to do, but what a cool thing! i want to do that.

im not there yet, but i want to be.

 

--jt