Lesson 2: Schools of Buddhism and Further Developments
This lesson deals with the centuries following the death of the Buddha, and describes the three major schools of Buddhism as well as the practice of meditation. A survey of major Buddhist texts is also included.
Buddhism is not a singular entity, but is composed of several schools. This lesson will give you an introduction to the three major divisions – Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana – and explain what makes each unique. These traditions can at times be so diverse that they hardly resemble each other at all, and seem linked only because they are derived from the works of a common teacher. As well, though there has never been widespread persecution or violence between these groups, they do recognize their differences and the difficulties in reconciling these incongruent elements.
This lesson will also further examine Buddhist doctrines, in practice and in print – meditation and literature. Meditation is not unique to Buddhism, but is certainly an integral part. We will examine its practice and role within the Buddhist tradition.
Buddhist scriptures, called “sutras”, will also be investigated. In our brief survey (the list of Buddhist sutras is extensive and cannot be easily condensed) we will examine works that are both within and outside of the original sutra pitaka.
It is often difficult and non-productive for Westerners to simply dive into Buddhist works in the hopes of gaining insight into Buddhism – many of the works are directed at Buddhist philosophers, monks, and adepts, and seem contradictory and ludicrous. In this section I hope to give you just a brief idea of a few key works. Once you feel confident in your understanding of Buddhism I encourage you to further pursue works that interest you.
At the close of this lesson there will be two more analytical questions. These questions are designed to sharpen your critical abilities. There are no correct or incorrect answers, but rather you will be asked to evaluate trends in Buddhist history and state your opinions. These are questions that have been asked both by Buddhists and those in the discipline of religious studies. There is a certainty of disagreement, and this disagreement will be based on the notions of “religion”, “tradition” and “faith” held by each individual. The purpose of this exercise is not to champion an “orthodox” Buddhism, but to show that all religions are in flux, and that the idea of orthodoxy is never clear cut (and sometimes completely irrelevant). As well, this lesson will again have a short multiple choice test to ascertain your recollection of important facts.
The Theravada - Mahayana Divide
The Buddhist community did not remain a singular group for long after the passing of the Buddha. This is a pattern that is apparent in most, if not all, of the world’s religions – a charismatic and insightful teacher develops a new understanding of reality, gathers about a crew of disciples who continue to propagate the doctrine after the teacher dies. This group of followers will always begin to disagree with each other and eventually the community is split. This is not limited to the immediate followers of the teacher – splits occur throughout the history of religions, centuries after they are founded.
In the early stages of Buddhism we find the Theravada-Mahayana split. The centuries following the death of Buddha produced several schools, though all either died out or were absorbed by one of these two. Both schools insist that their form of Buddhism is a more accurate version of the teachings espoused by the Buddha – however, despite their disagreements, these two schools actually shared monasteries in the beginning of their existence. Though they disagreed, the initial disagreements were not bitter.
Theravada Buddhism is often viewed by scholars as the more traditional approach, but this is only true in that it was the approach that was challenged by Mahayanists – this is no guarantee that it is a “purer” form of Buddhism, and most scholars admit it is a development on early Buddhist principles. The name Theravada means “old” or “venerable teaching”, and implies a claim to the true Buddhist heritage. Mahayana means “great vehicle”, and like the name Theravada was conceived of by members of the school. Mahayanists also developed a name for Theravada - Hinayana, which means “lesser vehicle”. Though this is derogatory towards Theravada, it still does admit that that tradition is a viable, though lesser, choice. The term “Hinayana” is not used today, and is considered bad taste and bad scholarship.
The crucial part of the disagreement rested on the role of the Buddhist practitioner – were they responsible for the liberation of other beings? The Theravada tradition held that the Buddha taught and instructed sentient beings, so to continue to do so was acceptable – but the main goal was to liberate oneself.
Mahayanists disagreed with this, claiming that the Buddhist had a duty to all beings to help them achieve enlightenment – and this idea is summed up in the Bodhisattva doctrine. A bodhisattva, which can be translated as “Buddha-to-be”, is a being that forgoes complete nirvana to be reincarnated again and continue teaching Buddhism in the hopes that someday every sentient being will be liberated from the cycle of samsara. Bodhisattvas take vows in which they declare they will eventually become Buddhas, but not until all are liberated. All are encouraged to make these vows in the Mahayana tradition.
There are other differences between the traditions. Mahayanists have developed a system – the trikaya doctrine - describing the three bodies of the Buddha – the Appearance Body, the Bliss Body, and the Dharma Body. These were all tied together and showed the unity of Buddhas in the past, present or future. It also gave rise to bodhisattva veneration and mythology, which will be examined closer in Lesson 3.
