Expert: Justin Choo - 12/3/2008

Question
QUESTION: Hi, I am trying to write an essay at university, on the differences between Theravada and mahayana Buddhism, but i am unfamiliar with many of the Buddhist terms and was wondering if you could help? I have found works on the differences between Mahayana and Theravada but not much on Nirvana regarding the two. Thank you, look forward to hearing from you soon,
Mez

ANSWER: Hi Mez,

I assume that you have found the info on the main topic except for not understanding the part on "Nirvana".

You would also find the difference in the spelling of Buddhist terms.  Mahayana uses Sanskrit, example Nirvana.  Theravada uses Pali, example Nibbana.  

There is no difference in the interpretation of Nibbana.  The difference is the "route" towards Nibbana.

Wikipedia is quite a good source @   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schools_of_Buddhism

The other site will be the "Mother" of all Buddhist sites @
www.buddhanet.net

If you need other info, please come back.

Justin Choo

[I like to invite you to visit my blog:]
http://lifeislikethat999.blogspot.com/

[And these sites by Rev. Dhammika:]
http://sdhammika.blogspot.com/
http://www.buddhismatoz.com/

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Hi Justin,

Thank you so much for the prompt reply, and the excellent website for buddhanet.net, it's truly excellent!

I'm a little bit confused on an aspect of the Buddhist nirvana that I've come across. On the Buddhanet website, I found the Mahayana texts-

http://www.buddhanet.net/ebooks_ms.htm

-which is actually a list of some of the Mahayana teachings and texts. Now my essay actually requires me to choose certain extracts from both the Mahayana and Theravada tradition and to analyse both to see how I could prove them to be positive, and dispel common misconceptions of the texts of nirvana being individualistic and negative.

I keep hearing the term Pure Land Buddhism-is this nirvana within Mahayana? this is what I have found when reading the information available on the website.

Also was wondering if I could use this as one of my extracts,

“If I attain complete, perfect enlightenment first without having established all sentient beings on the path of unsurpassed liberation, I would be violating my original vow – that would never do…Why? Sentient beings have not asked me to set my mind on enlightenment – I of my own accord act as an unsolicited friend to sentient beings,wishing to first cause all beings to fully develop their good potential and attain omniscience.”

(“The Ten Practices” Avatamsaka Sutra. Chapter 21. Thomas Cleary)


When I reference this, would I say it is from Master Thomas Cleary? Is this a reliable source, enough for it to represent the Nirvana in Mahayana Buddhism?

Now if I was to use this as a source in my essay, I would then need to express the negative one may find in this extract, but so far I have yet to find one. I see many positives of leaving samsara, but no negatives. I also see no selfish or individualistic nature in helping others reach enlightenment…?

I knwo it is a lot to ask, but I really need someone to help with the understanding of it all...

Look forward to hearing from you,

Mez


Answer
Hi Mez,

I assume that you are doing this purely on an academic basis for your assignment.  After this you should not waste your time trying to analyze the various schools based on intellectual interpretations.  This will be an utter waste of your valuable time which should be better used to study the teachings of the different schools, and then to concentrate on one which you are comfortable with.

There are a lot of suttras in the Mahayana which are not found in the Theravada school.  So there cannot be any comparison.

Pure Land is a Mahayana school.  It is believed that the believer will be born in Pure Land, and therafter will be assured enlightenment.

To know Pure Land, click here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_Land

I practise the Theravada tradition, so I do not study the Mahayana text.

I think you are going a step beyond the norm of academic study.  It is usual to write about some subject.  But unusual to embark on analysing something that does not exist in the topic.  The concept of Nibbana was expounded by an enlightened person called the Buddha.  Now we mere foolish mortals are trying to present a critical analysis of something that we know not much of.  I think your lecturer is trying to be cleverer than the Buddha!

Nibbana is individualistic and the ultimate bliss of liberation from this cycle of birth and death.


As for using quoted text, I think it's ok so long as you acknowledge the source.

"Now if I was to use this as a source in my essay, I would then need to express the negative one may find in this extract, but so far I have yet to find one. I see many positives of leaving samsara, but no negatives. I also see no selfish or individualistic nature in helping others reach enlightenment…?"
If you can find anything negative, then The Buddha's teachings would not worth a grain of salt!  It is because the Buddha's teachings are faultless, they are referred to as Gems, or Jewell.

Your lecturer is barking at the wrong tree!!

Assuming that you have come to the conclusion that you cannot find anything negative about Buddhism; then just tell your lecturer that you find Buddhist concepts faultless; so no contest.  How can you ever find fault on something that is faultless??!!  If a cake is so delicious, how can you set an assignment to find fault with it?  It doesn't make any sense!!  

Hope this helps.

Justin Choo