What school of Buddhism is the most authentic with regards to following the Buddha's teachings and intentions? What school, if any, would he belong to if he lived today?
All schools are upāya (skillful means) for different people. He literally told you not to get hung up on views and sectarian labels, dumbass.
>>18223344Theravada tradition was entirely created within the last 200 years by a Thai king that was strongly influenced by Protestant Christianity.https://vividness.live/the-king-of-siam-invents-western-buddhismFor over a thousand years the "Theravada" tradition was referred by the Mahayana sect as "Shravaka" which means "hearer" because they had entirely lost both the ability to read the language of Pali and the ability to meditate. All they did was chant small portions of their holy texts in a language they couldn't understand, in the hopes that this would grant them salvation.https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/how-early-buddhism-differs-from-theravada-a-checklist/23019Mahayana Buddhism on the other hand is entirely apocryphal and largely Chinese in origin. The Maha Prajnaparamita Sutra for example was written in bad Sanskrit by a Chinaman many centuries after the Buddha died.https://jayarava.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-heart-sutra-and-crisis-in-buddhist.html?m=1>>18223366t. Guenonfag
>>18223364THVTHNVKE>According to the Buddha, the Dharma is not an ultimate end in itself or an explanation of all metaphysical reality, but a pragmatic set of teachings. The Buddha used two parables to clarify this point, the 'Parable of the raft' and the Parable of the Poisoned Arrow. The Dharma is like a raft in the sense that it is only a pragmatic tool for attaining nirvana ("for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto", MN 22); once one has done this, one can discard the raft. It is also like medicine, in that the particulars of how one was injured by a poisoned arrow (i.e. metaphysics, etc.) do not matter in the act of removing and curing the arrow wound itself (removing suffering). In this sense, the Buddha was often called "the great physician" because his goal was to cure the human condition of suffering first and foremost, not to speculate about metaphysics>Having said this, it is still clear that resisting and even refuting a false or slanted doctrine can be useful to extricate the interlocutor, or oneself, from error; hence, to advance in the way of liberation. Witness the Buddha's confutation of several doctrines by Nigantha Nataputta and other purported sages which sometimes had large followings (e.g., Kula Sutta, Sankha Sutta, Brahmana Sutta). This shows that a virtuous and appropriate use of dialectics can take place. By implication, reasoning and argument shouldn't be disparaged by Buddhists>After the Buddha's death, some Buddhists such as Dharmakirti went on to use the sayings of the Buddha as sound evidence equal to perception and inference
>>18223344Enjoy Hell.
>>18223381So if Theravada was invented by the Thai and Mahayana was invented by the Chinese, what is left for someone who wants authentic Buddhism? Vajrayana?
>>18223428You. But also actually like more Vajrayana for being more direct whan Mahayana and accessible whan Therevada.Everything that supersessionist Mahayanikas say about Theravada, Vajrayanikas say about Mahayana. The Mahayanikas get it just as hard as they give it. Mahayana is the "shared teachings" for the "general population" of spiritual non-specialists. It is the grueling long path for those of dull faculties, the Shravaka path being conceived of as for those with even duller faculties. Vajrayana sees itself as "Special Mahayana," as opposed to "Common Mahayana" practiced by the plebeian masses. So-called "Common Mahayana" is characterized by its co-mingling of the provisional and ultimate. In contrast, the Tantras are framed as from exclusively the ultimate truth, with no provisional watering-down for the sake of the sensibilities of practitioners.It's something similar to Christianity. "Catholicism" is by etymology and definition an attempt to formulate some very local, specific, and exclusive (because impossibly demanding) ideas in a form that would make them universally ('katholos") resonant and acceptable. Paul's phrase - often diametrically misinterpreted by modern English speakers - that those who did not abide by the law of the Christian God were "a law unto themselves" means that he believed that Christian truth was already inherent in the truths of Greek, Roman, Babylonian etc paganism (so not just in Judaism, as Peter believed). This is a belief that is clearly at odds with Paul's more famous statement that Christ's truth was "a stumbling block to the Jews and a foolishness to the Greeks", i.e. that the truth of Christ is something radically unique and morally demanding to a point where no pagan could possibly accept or live up to it.
>>18223469The history of Christianity has basically been a millenial struggle between these two Pauline positions: Catholicism has attempted to give Christ's truth currency in a basically persistently pagan world; first Christian Gnosticism, then Lutheranism (but with many precursors such as Augustine and Catholic sympathizers such as the Jansenists) have insisted on the irreconcilable opposition between Christ's truth and the world's.Now this brings us to secrecy. In his commentary to Bodhisattvacaryāvatāra, if I'm not mistaken, it is Venerable Kunzang Pelden who states that "The possessions of the triple gem are dangerous." Why are they dangerous? To damage, destroy, or to steal the possessions of the triple gem is a far greater crime than destroying, damaging, or stealing any other kind of possession. This is not to say that most stealing is fine and only really stealing from the samgha is bad. That is not the lesson to get from this idea, regardless of if we agree with it. Malignancy towards the triple gem has greater consequences than most general malignancy. The Tantras, being framed as the highest summits of the Saddharma, are similarly dangerous and moreso.According to the Tantric self-narrative, when the Buddha taught the Tantras, he opened up a great pit of hell. This is not something Tantrikas say about their own religion. This is how I am categorizing it. The Tantras, and unlike "opened up a great pit hell" this is not just my characterization, have the power to send you directly to the Avici Hell if they are not practiced properly and if the wrong person practices them. They are seen as "dangerous" in a way similar to how the possessions of the triple gem are "dangerous." If you mess up in Tantra, you go to "special Tantrika hell," which is just a place in the standard Avici Hell, but still nonetheless that is the reason, or at least one, for the secrecy.
>>18223479Do you think Avicii went to Avici Hell for being born Swedish and killing himself?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MITA4FhVjDc
>>18223479>>18223492>Our hell isn't eternal, it only lasts seven quintillion years :)Isn't Buddhist hell still radically disproportionate to what any amount of bad karma could realistically deserve? Like, I know that to get into Avici hell you usually have to do something heinous like kill your own parents, but can countless kalpas of suffering really be fair for even that?
>>18223627There's at least one Bodhisattva in charge of bringing liberation to those stuck in hell. So it appears some Buddhists agree that billions of years is too much. Ksitigharbha if the link doesn't work.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%E1%B9%A3itigarbha
>>18223344>teachings Theravada>intentionsMahayana
>>18223492He realized how much he resembled Theo Von and couldn't handle it.
>>18223344Buddha is a semi-mythical figure so it's not really possible to know but >>18223364
