When did the gods become literate?
jspitanga at OPENLINK.COM.BR
Thu Nov 11 08:18:29 UTC 1999
>And it is my opinion that foreign lands never grasped Buddhism in its
>element - apart from the preservation of the scriptures, literature etc
>(which in truth doesn't amount to much), I know of none of the Buddhist
>lands (except Bhutan perhaps?), which took it seriously enough that its
>population turned vegetarian.
Who either grasps or does not grasp Buddhism is not a land, but those
intent on being Buddhists. And there is no need for the whole country's
population to follow Buddhist precepts in order to Buddhism be preserved
in such country - if this were true Buddhism would never have existed
even in India. Besides many Buddhists have been reported to be strict
vegetarians, for instance, in Tibet.
To sum up, you seem to be overconcerned with futile generalizations
and judgements, which definitely keep you far removed from any benefit
you could derive from Buddhist teachings, no matter how vegetarian you
>MahAyAna polemics does refer to three kinds of Bauddhas, which
>might map to TheravAda, Samskrutic HinayAna and MahAyAna :
>In the Saddharmapundarika, while trying to maintain the supremacy
>of MahAyAna over the other vehicles, bauddhas is split up into three
>as : 1. shravakas (TheravAdins), 2. Pratyeka bauddhas (SarvAstivAdins)
>and 3. Bodhisattvas (MahAyAnists). I request the specialists to confirm
Not being as much of a specialist as you would wish, it may be interesting
to remark that the literature of the three of Theravaadins, Sarvaastivaadins
and Mahaayaanists refer to the three of S'ravaakas, Pratyekabuddhas and
Also, although the first three (as well as many others such as
Sautraantikas) are differentiated in terms of their tenets, the last
three are differentiated in terms of their paths and fruits.
Non-specialistically (and non-futilely) yours,
More information about the INDOLOGY