Australia and the World Past and Present

Theravada

Theravada Buddhism is dominant is Southeast Asia. It is common in Thailand, Myanmar and Sri Lanka.

One might say that it is less ritualistic than some of the other forms of Buddhism. That is not to say that there is no ritual. It is there to some extent – especially for monks. Ritual is evident at ordinations and large events. But it is a question of degree.

Theravada aesthetics may be simpler than that found in Mahayana. This is a generalisation and there exceptions to the rule. Large temples in Southeast Asia may be very colourful and intricate, but most centers in the West will usually be more restrained.

Monks wear robes while lay practitioners do not.

Rationality and logic is not shunned in Theravada. Teachings tend to be quite clear. The 4 Nobel Truths constitute the core of the teaching. It is often said that there rest of the teachings can fit within this original teaching. Teachings are often presented with numbered steps. The eight-fold path is seen as essential. There are causes and there are effects. In this way, Theravada presents as very rational. Lay members will frequently ask monks questions which are answered in very straightforward ways.

The central texts for Theravada school are contained in the Pāli Canon much of which is said to have been formed around the 5th century BCE.

Teachings were spoken by the Buddha and memorised by his disciples.

After the Buddha passed away, his teachings were passed on orally for centuries before being written down in the 1st century BCE.

Followers of Theravada focus on the historical Buddha.

In Buddhist centers one will often find a statue of the Buddha.

In Theravada, the objective is to become an Arahant – a fully awakened one.

One seeks to remove the key defilements of greed, anger and delusion.

The goal is to achieve Nirvana and escape from the cycle of birth and rebirth that is Samara.

Not much is said about Buddha-nature in Theravada, nor non-duality nor emptiness.

Monastics will be celibate and follow the Vinaya rules for monks.

Mahayana

The Mahayana school of Buddhism contains Zen and Pure Land Buddhism. There is a bit of a debate about whether Tibetan is Mahayana or whether it is part of another category of Buddhism. Still, many do regard it as Mahayana.

One might say that Mahayana is more devotional than Theravada Buddhism. For example, in Pure Land Buddhism belief in and appeals to Amitabha Buddha are seen to be very important.

Mantras are a common feature of many Mahayana schools.

Ritual tends to be very important.

In some Mahayana schools lay followers may wear robes – not just the monks. This is the case with the Zen center that I used to go to.

Mahayana tends to be more guru-based. Senior monks often work one-on-one with more junior monks, advising them on which texts to study and which practices to undertake. The master-disciple relationship is seen to be very important. This certainly the case with Tibetan Buddhism.

Some Mahayana schools are strongly esoteric. In Theravada, the teachings are written down in the suttas and are accessible to anyone who chooses to read them. In esoteric traditions, much is not written down but is passed on in a personalised way from teacher to student. There is no way to receive these teachings outside of the system. So in a way, these are private or hidden teachings.

Mahayana monks can appear to be quite different to their counterparts in the Theravada tradition. Mahayana monks might follow the bodhisattva precepts rather than the vinaya. Japanese monks are sometimes married.

Mahayana tends to present as more mystical and less rational than Theravada. For example, Zen uses koans. These are non-logical riddles that can’t be solved rationally. The idea is to use them as a means of cutting off conceptual or dualistic thinking.

Mahayana texts tend to be older than Theravada texts.

Visualisations of deities might be part of Mahayana practice.

The use of hand mudras is another feature found in these schools. Mudras don’t seem to have been very important in the Pāli Canon.

Theravada Buddhism often stresses that Nirvana can take many, many lifetimes to achieve. It is an incredibly long process. Mahayana won the marketing battle in a way because it says that you can become a Buddha in this very life.

In Mahayana you can find many Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. There is a veritable pantheon of Buddhist deities. Avalokiteshvara is a common one. He is the bodhisattva of compassion. In China he is called Guanyin. In Japan he is known as Kannon. The plethora of bodhisattvas in Mahayana reminds me of the many saints in the Catholic Church.

Whereas the goal of Theravada was to become an Arahant and not be reborn back into this world, in Mahayana the idea is to become a bodhisattva and keep returning to this world to help all other sentient beings on the path. Thus, the bodhisattva vow becomes important in Mahayana. This represented quite a profound shift within Buddhism – from wanting to leave this world to wanting to come back time and again. This voluntary re-entry into the world of suffering doesn’t make a lot of sense to Theravada followers.

One might say that the Teravada path was somewhat narrower than the Mahayana one. In Theravada you were pretty much on your own to work out your own liberation. You had the example of the Buddha and the wisdom of the suttas, but your efforts were you own. In Mahayana there seems to be a broader view – of concern for all other sentient beings. And followers often call on the various Buddhas and Bodhisattvas to intervene in their lives to help them along. This can be clearly seen in Pure Land Buddhism.

As Buddhism has been around for millennia, it is to be expected that different schools would emerge over time. There is a geographic difference – Theravada tends to be dominant in Southeast Asia while Mahayana is more common as one travels eastwards. There are differences in texts, rituals, the role of Buddhas and bodhisattavas and the importance of the bodhisattva vow.