Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism

Where do Theravada, Tibetan and Zen Buddhism come from? When the
Buddha passed away 2500 years ago, the monks agreed upon 84,000 lines
of his dhamma teachings in the Pali suttas, at the First Council. 100
years later the sangha convened the Second Council to stamp out
heresies within the religion. Again they agreed upon the same 84,000
lines from the Buddha and nothing of importance has been lost to the
present day. About 137 years after the Buddha, there was a serious
rift within the sangha, the first major split in views. The rift was
led by Mahadeva who was a charismatic leader and he resonated with a
cord deep in Buddhist society because many lay people objected to the
god-like respect and authority that the enlightened arahants had.
Mahadeva turned against the arahants by putting forth his views that
they were not yet fully evolved because of these five shortcomings:
allegedly some arahants were prone to seminal emissions in their
sleep, had nightmares, were still subject to doubts, they were
ignorant of many things, and they owed their salvation to the guidance
of others. Also at issue was the belief that the suttas were the
ultimate authority in Buddhism. Mahadeva disputed this, holding that
it was possible for the Buddha's revelation to come anywhere at
anytime, so people shouldn't have to cling to the suttas. This remains
the big issue today.

Mahadeva won the popular debate and thousands of people followed his
lead but the established Theras, the elders, renounced their views as
a heresy. Mahadeva's sangha called themselves the Mahasanghikas- "the
great community," and about 60% of Buddhists today can trace back
their lineage to this one man. Two or three centuries after Mahadeva,
there were eleven schools of thought similar to the Theravadins and
seven schools of the Mahasanghikas. Within a few of those Mahasanghika
groups there arose a new tradition around 50 B.C., called the
"Mahayana." They called the dominant quasi Theravada Buddhist schools
of the day, the "Hinayana." The other Mahasanghikas who didn't agree
to go along with the change were also put down as Hinayanists. The
'Hinayana' is translated as 'lesser wheel' but really it translates as
'crummy wheel' or vile, disgusting, lousy. In this way the fledgling
Mahayanists attempted to assert their superiority over the
Theravadins. This process didn't happen overnight. It began as the
bodhisattvayana in several of the seven schools of the Mahasanghikas-
all now extinct. By 400 AD the full blown idea of the Mahayana was
consummated.

Ajahn Sona says "The way to bring down a religion is by creating a
conflicting sect within it." The Mahayanists set about creating a new
cosmology which radically contradicted what the Buddha taught in the
Pali suttas. The Mahayanists introduced the new idea of celestial
Buddhas and celestial bodhisattvas and the bodhisattva vow, instead of
the arahant ideal. They created numerous fictitious celestial
bodhisattvas and Buddhas which are supposed to be fully enlightened.
In this way they put down the Theravadin devas as unenlightened so the
Mahayana claims to have a 'higher' cosmology.

The Buddha prophecized "The end of my dispensation will come not from
direct oppression, but from counterfeit dharma." The Mahayanists have
done just that by creating volumes of 'pious fabrications' or
counterfeit discourses called 'sutras'. From 50 BC until 800 AD they
created about 10,000 – 15,000 pages of these Mahayana sutras, new and
improved discourses of the Buddha, such that Mahayanists do not know
which sutras are real and which are counterfeit. This situation is
well documented and there is no controversy about this. The Mahayana
still has much of the Buddha's teachings and this is not a simple
situation where one is all right and the other is all wrong but it is
very important that you have this inoculation, or heads up, if you
investigate different Buddhist groups. Google "Buddhist history" and
do your own research to get off on the right foot with Buddhism.

The Buddha only taught one wheel of dhamma. His rule was that
teachings should be carefully compared to the suttas and the vinaya
(Discipline) and if they are in harmony then you can accept them but
if they are not in harmony, you should reject them. Good luck.

Brian Ruhe


From http://www.theravada.ca/theravada-and-mahayana-buddhism/