Talk:Hinayana/Archive 3

message: Buddhism (both Nikaya and Mahayana traditions) accepts that there are three type of Buddha, and generally accept their definitions as follows:  
Samyaksam-Buddhas (Pali:Samma-Sambuddha): (also known in the Mahayana as Bodhisattva-Buddhas) gain Nirvana by their own efforts, without a teacher of the entire path, and they then lead others to enlightenment by turning the wheel of Dharma where it has not been turned before.
:Bit nitpicking but "wheel" symbolism is not so popular in Oriental Mahayana.  I know it is to some extent Theravada use it and it is huge in Tibetan.  Just to be neutral, I think use of "path" and "vehicle" would be more appropriate.FWBOarticle
::I disagree a little bit. What is meant by turning the wheel of Dharma, is initiating the teachings for the first time.  Buddha turned the (first) wheel of Dharma at Sarnath, with the Sutra on the four noble truths. Of course the Mahayana say that there were 3 or 4 turnings of the wheel.  But we cannot replace the terminology with something that means something else, right?  (20040302)
:::O.K. just don't make it into tantra=third turning of wheel thingy.  We can explain the difference in later section.  FWBOarticle
::::I wasn't about to mention tantra! Promise! (20040302)
*Pratyeka-Buddhas (Pali:Pacceka-Buddha): are similar to Samma-Sambuddha, in that they attain Nirvana by themselves, but they remain silent and keep the discovered Dharma to themselves. 
*Sravaka-Buddhas (Pali:Savaka-Buddhas): gain Nirvana, but attain Enlightenment by hearing the Dhamma as initially taught by a Samma-Sambuddha. After attaining enlightenment, Savaka-Buddhas also lead others to enlightenment; however, they are not able to turn the wheel of Dharma - they depend upon the (re)discovery of the path by a Samyaksam-Buddha.
:In you background, difference between Buddah and Arahat is huge.  And obviously Theravada takes opposite stance.  Just mention that this class of buddah atain nirvana by hearing dharma, which everyone agree.  What teaching capacity or their concern of salvation of others or how many buudahs are here to revive dharma is disputed topic which is much better to be expalined in detail.
::The distintion is not 'huge', but it is a distinction.   The distinction is as I mentioned in these paragraphs, which is in accordance with the Nikaya as well. What may make it appear huge is that there is a strong emphasis on the difference of motive, rather than on result. Regardless, the definitions as I wrote them are not contradictory to either Nikaya or to the Mahayana in general, so why stir mud? (20040302)
:::That is the problem.  "Turning the wheel of the dharma" could simply means "to teach".  That is why Arahat could turn the wheel, just that they weren't the first one. Obviously, if you translate it as to "discover dharma" then it get into Mahayana realm.   And you know this is the point of dispute. So, arahat not turning wheel have to come down.  As of emphasis, I think there are emphasis on the different motive as well as the ability to teach.
::::Okay, I have rewritten this to avoid the wheel terminology.  I am relying on the Pali source I quoted before for the distinction between a Samyaksam-Buddha and a Sravaka-Buddha, so this should not be contentious - The Nikaya school does agree that the Sravaka-Buddhas might also lead others to enlightenment, but cannot teach the Dharma where (or when) it has not been taught before. This distinction can be found in the Pali canon, in the Khandhasamyutta. Okay? (20040302)
:::::firstly, can you actually quote it.  Secondly, I'm bit susicious of this "where (or when)" thingy.  Can you be more accurate.  If where acutally refer to this entire world, the argument become bit irrelevant.  If not feel free to revert my deletion. FWBOarticle 11:32, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Three types of Buddha