3bob Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) Ok ForestOE, Which of those schools do you feel is following the historic Buddha more closely, it's not a free-for-all is it? (and is probably part of the disagreement you mention) Edited January 29, 2016 by 3bob Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
forestofclarity Posted January 29, 2016 Personally, I think the closest to what the Buddha taught is contained in the Pali Suttas, prior to the Abhidhamma. In my opinion, the Mahayana is not what the original Buddha taught, but an expansion, deepening, and evolving of the Buddha's original insights into something even more powerful. And so it had to be: early Buddhists were quasi-hermetic monastics in a non-industrial civilization. As a modern lay person in a civilization with extremely advanced technology, I find myself in a different position than the early Buddhists. Given my low capacity, I need something more powerful. I don't think it's a free-for-all--- different paths evolve for different people. What's good for one may not be good for the other. The more pressing question is which path is the most effective for each of us. Ok ForestOE, Which of those schools do you feel is following the historic Buddha more closely, it's not a free-for-all is it? (and is probably part of the disagreement you mention) 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
3bob Posted January 29, 2016 well said man, (although there is the aspect of lineages tracing back to the authority of a founder - since Buddhism does have one) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
