Mahayana Vs. Theravada: A Multiform Comparison

Significant differences abound between the two principal schools of modern Buddhism, Mahayana and Theravada. Among the many distinctions that exist, a few could be considered especially integral to an understanding of how these mutually exclusive divisions contrast with each other. Before treating these specific dissimilarities, however, it must be established that the one, fundamental divergence between the sects, which could possibly be understood as resulting in the following earmarks that make both brands unique unto the other, is that Mahayana practice stresses an inclusiveness that stands antithetically to Theravada’s doctrinal preservation. Where the former sort’s adaptability has both attracted new practitioners and altered itself to complement modernity, the latter’s staunch resistance to change has allowed it to remain an uncompromised vessel of original Buddhist thought, battered by, yet having weathered well, two millennia’s worth of transformation.

Building upon this thesis, one of the most overt examples of Mahayanistic lability, or revisionism from a more critical perspective, has been its adoption of the Bodhisattva ideal in outlining the preferable path for an enlightened individual to take. The sacrificial model of the Bodhisattva coexists well with western perceptions of what qualities a superior being should possess—Christ-like compassion and selflessness. Even though little emphasis was placed on any dutiful forbearance of Nirvana in the first teachings of Buddhism, this heroic concept, resounding well with newer followers, has become mainstay in Mahayana tradition. Thus, where Mahayana Buddhists preach a magnanimous rejection of personal salvation as being their terminal goal, this lofty effo...

... middle of paper ...

...o recognize a woman’s right to choose under any circumstances, and Mahayana’s approach being a more modified and mollified position, recognizing a right to life, but offering extenuations, it becomes apparent which variety promulgates a value system that corresponds more closely with that of the populace of the modern era. Hence, the Mahayana mindset departs from traditionalism again to promote fellowship, which sensitivity to public opinion will undoubtedly propagate.

The preceding examples have been offered to reinforce the postulation that, while a wide variety of disagreements exists between the two most prominent vehicles of Buddhistic transmission, their origins lie in one, reduced difference of opinion—whether or not a changing of the guard and a resultant boost in numbers is preferable to a conservation of tradition capable of alienating newcomers.