Is Mahayana a Distorted Sect of Buddhism According to Theravada?

Frequently debated in the world of Buddhism, the relationship between Mahayana and Theravada traditions often raises questions about the authenticity and purity of their teachings. This article explores the core differences and criticisms as presented by Theravada Buddhism, providing an in-depth analysis of the claims that Mahayana teachings deviate from the primary teachings of Buddha.

The Authenticity of Mahayana Teachings

One of the central arguments against Mahayana Buddhism is the claim that Buddha did not teach its practices, or at least, did not teach them to the extent as claimed. According to Theravada teachings, Buddha never instructed anyone to suspend their own enlightenment to help others, nor did he endorse the idea that enlightenment could be achieved through chanting, practices associated with Nichiren Buddhism, or the concept of relying on a textual precepts such as the Pure Land or Vajrayana.

Mahayana Practices and Core Teachings

The Bodhisatta Vow: One of the most distinctive features of Mahayana practice is the Bodhisatta vow. This vow states, 'I won’t achieve Nibbana until all sentient beings are liberated.' This vow raises several questions and criticisms. Firstly, how can one achieve Nibbana if one is still bound by the vow to rescue all beings? If the vow to save all beings is considered impossible, then it serves as a deterrent rather than a motivation for achieving enlightenment.

Theravada teachings often argue that Buddha's primary focus was on individual enlightenment, acknowledging that the capability to comprehend the dhamma is dependent on each individual. Therefore, it is impractical for anyone to set out with the intention to save all beings, as this is indeed an unattainable goal and can hinder one's own path toward enlightenment.

The Nature of Enlightenment in Mahayana

Another key criticism of Mahayana by Theravada scholars is the concept that one can achieve Buddhahood in this life. Mahayana texts often portray the possibility of attaining full enlightenment as a viable option for anyone, encouraging them to renounce worldly life like Siddhattha (the historical Buddha). However, Theravada argues that such encouragement undermines the value of the monastic tradition and the teachings of Buddha.

Paradoxical Nature of Mahayana Vows

The supposed universality of Mahayana vows to save all beings has also been critiqued as being paradoxical. If everyone is willing to save all beings, then who are they actually willing to save? This limitation creates a logical inconsistency where the very vow that is meant to save all beings becomes redundant, as it assumes the non-existence of willing beings to save others.

Moreover, the idea that one can achieve Buddhahood (samma-sambuddha) and then refuse to be liberated for the sake of helping others has been criticized as a misunderstanding of Buddha's teachings. It is argued that imagining oneself to be nothing but a teacher and refusing to attain enlightenment is a form of ignorance, as it goes against the ultimate goal of Nirvana.

Buddha's Last Advice and Dhamma Vinaya

Buddha's final teachings emphasized the impermanence of all conditioned phenomena and the importance of relying on the Dhamma Vinaya as the true refuge. This advice is often contrasted with the Mahayana practice, which is argued to be misguided by its emphasis on a future goal rather than immediate enlightenment. As Buddha said, the Dhamma Vinaya will continue to be the path to liberation and salvation even after his passing.

The criticism extends to the way Mahayana, in its early stages, derogatorily labeled Theravada as "Hinayana," implying it was inferior or "smaller vehicle." This labeling showed a lack of respect for the Theravada tradition, which is as significant and valuable as any other path to enlightenment. Theravada includes the pursuit of fully enlightened savaka-buddhas (arahants) as a valid path, alongside the other two types of Buddhahood described in Mahayana - pacceka-buddha and samma-sambuddha.

The Importance of Present-Mindedness

Buddhism encourages living in the present and making the most of current circumstances. Any practice that relies on a future, uncertain goal can distract one from the present. The Mahayana vow to save all beings for the sake of others can be seen as culturally and spiritual erroneous, as it distracts practitioners from their own liberation and the immediate benefits of following Buddha's teachings.

In conclusion, the arguments presented by Theravada Buddhism highlight the importance of individual and timely enlightenment, as authenticended by Buddha. It underscores the critic of Mahayana practices and their potential to mislead practitioners from their true spiritual path. By emphasizing immediate enlightenment and following Buddha's teachings, Theravada Buddhism provides a clear and direct path towards Nirvana.