Belief-O-Matic

[icarus]

Gacked from bluemoon02.
http://beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html

1. Mahayana Buddhism (100%)
2. Hinduism (90%)
3. Theravada Buddhism (89%)
4. Liberal Quakers (82%)
5. Neo-Pagan (82%)
6. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (79%)
7. Unitarian Universalism (78%)
8. Jainism (76%)
9. Taoism (76%)
10. New Age (74%)
11. Sikhism (74%)
12. Bahá'í Faith (68%)
13. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (67%)
14. New Thought (63%)
15. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (62%)
16. Orthodox Quaker (60%)
17. Scientology (56%)
18. Jehovah's Witness (51%)
19. Secular Humanism (49%)
20. Reform Judaism (47%)
21. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (45%)
22. Orthodox Judaism (41%)
23. Seventh Day Adventist (40%)
24. Eastern Orthodox (28%)
25. Roman Catholic (28%)
26. Islam (25%)
27. Nontheist (24%)

Dead on accurate. I burst out laughing - I've been a Mahayana Buddhist for 17 years, was a monastic for 14 years.

I find it interesting that my views are closer to Hinduism than Theravada Buddhism, but my sect of Mahayana Buddhism has often been accused of being Hinduism by the Theravadas, so I think that's accurate as well.

The Theravadas do not accept the compassionate and broad view of the Mahayana and the teaching on Ultimate Truth as being the teaching of the Buddha, you see. There is a specific text on this called the 'Uttaratantra' that the Theravadas say "no way did the Buddha teach this" while the Mayahanists say "yes way." When you have a 3,000 year-old religion you get debates like this. Fortunately, Buddhists tend to not condemn the other schools as heresy so there have been relatively few atrocities (yes, there have been some) over these differences.

The Mahayanists tend to view the other forms of Buddhism as 'branches' of Buddhism, though there's a little smug superiority in the word 'Maha-yana' (strictly translated: High Path).

This was fun.

Comments

[laurelwood.livejournal.com]

Hey, this thing is pretty neat! It told me I was first and foremost a Quaker, but Reform Judaism (the religion I consciously chose for myself once upon a time) was #3, and the "Jehovah's Witness" and "Mormon" were at the very bottom, so it was a pretty accurate result after all.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

In my opinion, we don't have enough Quakers in the world. *grins*

I think this thing's very accurate. But it didn't include either Vajrayana Buddhism (which is the branch I practice) or Zen, which is quite popular. Although I expect most would consider both to be Mahayana.

Icarus

[clymer.livejournal.com]

I was wondering if you could clear something up for me. (University classes about Buddhism are only worth so much when they're taught by non-Buddhists.) I was under the impression that "Mahayana" meant something like "big vessel," which is why some Mahayana Buddhists called Theravada Buddhism "Hinayana," or "small vessel." I'm guessing this means some liberties were taken with the translation I received.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Mahayana is a Sanskrit term. I don't know Sanskrit, but I do know some Tibetan, and I have a Tibetan-Sankrit Dictionary.

The Tibetan term for Mahayana is 'Tegpa Chenpo' which means Great Vehicle. Theravada (which is a specific sect of Hinayana) is called Hinayana, which in Tibetan is 'Tegpa Chungwa' or Small Vehicle.

I looked it up in the Tibetan-Sanskrit dictionary, so that my answer and translation is very exact.

'Vessel' is a weird translation, possibly an attempt to avoid the divisive implications of 'Greater and Lesser', and an attempt to describe how the Mahayana actually contains all the elements of the Hinayana, rather than being a separate animal. In that respect it is accurate.

So, this is the long way to explain the exact translation of the Sanskrit term Mahayana.

Maha means Great (or Greater).
Yana means Vehicle or Path. It does not mean vessel.

Thanks for asking. I really like discussing these things.

Icarus

[schmevil.livejournal.com]

This was a surprisingly accurate quiz and fun to take. The one thing that really disappoints me about fandom is a reluctance to deeply, or even glancingly discuss spirituality or morality.

(If you wondered, I'm a secular humanist).

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

Secular Humanist, that sounds reasonable. I always liked their view of psychology. Get into spiritual matters all you like here. There's another who's into this stuff... said almost the same thing too... who was it... *searches, we were having a discussion on the importance of irrelevant kindness and the effect of time on perception*...

Icarus

[schmevil.livejournal.com]

Mmm. You're making me want to do a post on spirituality in fanfic. How it's expressed by the very silence on it. How people betray their beliefs when they refuse to talk about 'serious' subjects in fandom, because it's Just Fandom.

:)

Importance of irrelevant kindness?

[bluemoon02.livejournal.com]

I've only really been learning about Buddhism (And for the first year we learn mainly Theravada) in college for a year....But looking at it from the kind-of-but-not-quite Hindu perspective, I'd say I agree with a lot of the principals...except the biggy...But the way of life, the way everyone is equal and everyone has a chance to be enlightened...The way that The Buddha isn't so much worshipped as respected....I like that...And Buddhas (Two of them - one of Siddhartha, one of the Chinese variety) sit on either side of Ganesh on my shrine...*smiles*

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

*grins* Read about Vajrayana or Tibetan Buddhism (aka Tantra). That's the form of Mahayana Buddhism that is often accused of being Hindu, especially the oldest form, Nyingma.

The Nyingmapas are very poetic mystics, and pull some of their poetic imagery from major works of the time, especially Hindu works. Beware the BS out there on the subject though (of which there is a LOT). 'Tantric Practice in Nyingma' by Jeffery Hopkins has a good explanation and is relatively short. Buddhism gets really interesting when you start getting to Vajrayana, and the Hindus are usually quite comfortable with the things that freak the Christians out. *grins* Actually, Ashtanga Yoga has some similarities with some types of Tantric Buddhist practice, and is quite profound if you ever have a chance to practice it.

Icarus

[bluemoon02.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure we do Tibetan Buddhism next year...But from what I've heard from my Dad, it sounds quite a bit like Hinduism....But that's cool....It's like my Aunt used to say...Everyone's climbing the same mountain...It's just some of us choose different paths!

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

No, it isn't though. I'm not sure if your Dad is a Vajrayana practitioner or not. Hinduism in its core belief is closer to Christianity than it is to any form of Buddhism, because it believes in a God or Gods. Buddhism does not, and this is fundamental.

Theravada Buddhists mistake Tibetan Buddhism for Hinduism because that they don't realise that there's a refinement between the two extremes that naturally takes place. When you say something is empty, you veer towards nihilism, denying existence, appearances of reality.

When you describe True Nature, Buddhanature, in the Uttaratantra, there is a tendency (very strong tendency) to make that Buddhanature into a diety or God, or even say your ego is the Buddhanature. (Which in a way it is, but not in the clinging way this is intended.)

In Vajrayana, illusory appearances and emptiness are simultaneous - inseperable. Which is in fact the truth. It's set up to give you a direct experience of that, working with your habitual tendencies to cut ego clinging, to antidote them.

Icarus

The Svatantrika view of Buddhism still believes

[bluemoon02.livejournal.com]

You're right on the God(s) front...Buddhism is in a land of its own!...And Dad's actually a Pagan...of sorts...He just lived in Tibet for a while when he was younger...*Smiles*

Will prolly give a longer comment tomorrow....Scream sequels make my brain stop functioning!

[cursive.livejournal.com]

I was a bit floored by this quiz, which told me I was a Unitarian Universalist first of all which... well, not. And the second ranked option at 97% was Liberal Quaker, which might be interesting because I attended for several years but stopped. But third was liberal christian, which I feel less than zero personal affinity with. And, finally, my lowest ranking sect was Roman Catholic, which was the faith of my childhood I was intensely attached to until adolescence and then rejected but for which I still feel something, even if the something is at best shame. So, having given such questions a great deal of thought I'm a bit puzzled by the analysis of my answers. Perhaps it's because I chose a lot of "none of the above" options.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

I think what will happen if you do that is it will over-emphasize the answers you did give.

Icarus

[blackbanditt.livejournal.com]

It was an interesting quiz. And it did seem to have a large variety of religions as possible results, which I appreciated. Although some of their information didn't seem completely correct, to me.

[icarusancalion.livejournal.com]

They generalised a lot, 'tis true.

Icarus

[wishwords.livejournal.com]

This was fun but the results were weird. It claimed I was 100% Unitarian Universalist and only 94% Nontheist. I'm not sure how it got UU out of all the 'No God' and 'NA' answers I gave...

I've tried to follow discussions of Buddhism but I find myself feeling like Neville; lost in Potions class. It's amazing and brilliant to see but I haven't a bloody clue how it works.