When did theravada and mahayana Buddhism split?
Answers
Answered by
1
here is your answer
Early Buddhism Schools. The Early Buddhist Schools were the various schools in which pre-sectarian Buddhism split in the first few centuries after the passing away of the Buddha (in about the 5th century
Conflict between Hinayana and Mahayana Buddhism
After Shakyamuni’s passing, the Buddhist order split into two groups, the Theravada school, which literally interpreted Shakyamuni’s teachings and doctrines and strictly followed traditions, and the Mahasamghika school, which tried to understand the true meaning of the words to reveal their true spirit. These two groups eventually divided into twenty schools.
In the process of shifting from Shakyamuni’s fundamental Buddhism to sectarian Buddhism, the Theravada school and its branches started to adopt non-Buddhist teachings. Seeing this, the people from the Mahasamghika school reconsidered their position on non-Buddhist teachings adopted by earlier schools and voluntarily went back to fundamental Buddhism. The Mahasamghika school was the forerunner of the Mahayana movement. Gradually, Mahayana Buddhists differentiated themselves from the earlier schools of Theravada, calling them Hinayana. The Daishonin discusses this in his Gosho, “The Teaching, Capacity, Time and Country”:
When we look at Theravada we see relative unity. But this is apparent unity that formed relatively recent. The Theravada lineage is linked to Burma/Myanmar and Sri Lanka. At first the teachings were preserved through the Sri Lankan lineage which enabled the Burmese lineage to form. At later time the Burmese lineage allowed the Sri Lankan lineage to continue. Burma being in the same region as Thailand allowed for Burmese influence in Thai Buddhism as well.
This latter is important to understand when we view at Buddhism in Thailand in the past two centuries, it’s now in a very different state as in the early 1900’s.
Within Theravada Buddhism we find reform movements over and over to counter political and cultural influences and to return to ‘true Buddhism’.
The apparent reconciliation between the Buddhist branches emerges because the separation is lifted. About a century ago a Zen monk would have been confined to Japan, a Theravada monk to Burma or Thailand. Specially those who practice the orthodox way, which allows for less contact and travel. If we wanted to learn Zen or meditation according to the Thai Forest Tradition we either had to wait for such a teacher or monk to visit our country or to travel to their country (which also involved bridging the language gap)
Nowadays an airplane can bring a monk or teacher anywhere in the world within a day or two. Books are written and distributed. They are translated in other languages. We find the original boundaries disappearing and with the emerging of the internet it’s a matter of two or three clicks with the mouse to access both the strict Theravada interpretation of the suttas and in another tab open writings by a Zen/Chan monk like Thich Nhat Hahn.
We find that from a helicopter view the two branches don’t differ too much and that individual traits of prominent members are similar. This creates a feeling of unity. But reality is harder. Because the large groups of people are still separated. A Thai Buddhist monk does not have easy access to his Vietnamese counterpart. And thus misunderstanding keeps appearing. Add to this that there is strong influence, power, in these groups and pressure applied from outside (politics anyone?) and it becomes apparent that actual reconciliation of the two branches is far apart.
This goes even stronger for the third branch, the Tibetan, which stands even further from the bare basics of Theravada Buddhism.
100 years after the Buddha's Parinibbana the Second Council convenes in Vesali to discuss controversial points of Vinaya. The first schism of the Sangha occurs, in which the Mahasanghika school parts ways with the traditionalist Sthaviravadins. At issue is the Mahasanghika's reluctance to accept the Suttas and the Vinaya as the final authority on the Buddha's teachings. This schism marks the first beginnings of what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism, which would come to dominate Buddhism in northern Asia (China, Tibet, Japan, Korea)
hope you understand
Early Buddhism Schools. The Early Buddhist Schools were the various schools in which pre-sectarian Buddhism split in the first few centuries after the passing away of the Buddha (in about the 5th century
Conflict between Hinayana and Mahayana Buddhism
After Shakyamuni’s passing, the Buddhist order split into two groups, the Theravada school, which literally interpreted Shakyamuni’s teachings and doctrines and strictly followed traditions, and the Mahasamghika school, which tried to understand the true meaning of the words to reveal their true spirit. These two groups eventually divided into twenty schools.
In the process of shifting from Shakyamuni’s fundamental Buddhism to sectarian Buddhism, the Theravada school and its branches started to adopt non-Buddhist teachings. Seeing this, the people from the Mahasamghika school reconsidered their position on non-Buddhist teachings adopted by earlier schools and voluntarily went back to fundamental Buddhism. The Mahasamghika school was the forerunner of the Mahayana movement. Gradually, Mahayana Buddhists differentiated themselves from the earlier schools of Theravada, calling them Hinayana. The Daishonin discusses this in his Gosho, “The Teaching, Capacity, Time and Country”:
When we look at Theravada we see relative unity. But this is apparent unity that formed relatively recent. The Theravada lineage is linked to Burma/Myanmar and Sri Lanka. At first the teachings were preserved through the Sri Lankan lineage which enabled the Burmese lineage to form. At later time the Burmese lineage allowed the Sri Lankan lineage to continue. Burma being in the same region as Thailand allowed for Burmese influence in Thai Buddhism as well.
This latter is important to understand when we view at Buddhism in Thailand in the past two centuries, it’s now in a very different state as in the early 1900’s.
Within Theravada Buddhism we find reform movements over and over to counter political and cultural influences and to return to ‘true Buddhism’.
The apparent reconciliation between the Buddhist branches emerges because the separation is lifted. About a century ago a Zen monk would have been confined to Japan, a Theravada monk to Burma or Thailand. Specially those who practice the orthodox way, which allows for less contact and travel. If we wanted to learn Zen or meditation according to the Thai Forest Tradition we either had to wait for such a teacher or monk to visit our country or to travel to their country (which also involved bridging the language gap)
Nowadays an airplane can bring a monk or teacher anywhere in the world within a day or two. Books are written and distributed. They are translated in other languages. We find the original boundaries disappearing and with the emerging of the internet it’s a matter of two or three clicks with the mouse to access both the strict Theravada interpretation of the suttas and in another tab open writings by a Zen/Chan monk like Thich Nhat Hahn.
We find that from a helicopter view the two branches don’t differ too much and that individual traits of prominent members are similar. This creates a feeling of unity. But reality is harder. Because the large groups of people are still separated. A Thai Buddhist monk does not have easy access to his Vietnamese counterpart. And thus misunderstanding keeps appearing. Add to this that there is strong influence, power, in these groups and pressure applied from outside (politics anyone?) and it becomes apparent that actual reconciliation of the two branches is far apart.
This goes even stronger for the third branch, the Tibetan, which stands even further from the bare basics of Theravada Buddhism.
100 years after the Buddha's Parinibbana the Second Council convenes in Vesali to discuss controversial points of Vinaya. The first schism of the Sangha occurs, in which the Mahasanghika school parts ways with the traditionalist Sthaviravadins. At issue is the Mahasanghika's reluctance to accept the Suttas and the Vinaya as the final authority on the Buddha's teachings. This schism marks the first beginnings of what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism, which would come to dominate Buddhism in northern Asia (China, Tibet, Japan, Korea)
hope you understand
Answered by
0
Theravada Buddhism is associated with South East Asia and is perhaps closer to the original Indian form ofBuddhism. As Mahayana Buddhismspread north through Tibet and China, it took on more local customs.
Similar questions