[Buddha-l] caste-ist term ?

[Richard Hayes]

On Jul 25, 2009, at 5:11 AM, Mike Austin wrote:

> It is disparaging to apply the term 'Hinayana' to an identified  
> group of
> practitioners but, if it is a generic term, does it disparage  
> anyone? Do
> any practitioners describe themselves as 'Hinayana'?

This cannot be said often enough. Thanks for saying it again, Mike.

> Perhaps this precept is really about not applying the term  
> 'Hinayana' to
> actual practitioners while, at the same time, reminding oneself that  
> the
> Mahayana is, well, 'Maha'.

Years ago I was reading a Pali commentary to Buddhaghosa's  
Visuddhimaggo and was pleasantly surprised to see him making a  
distinction between taking vows and following precepts in a hīnayāna  
fashion and taking them in a mahāyāna fashion. The former individual,  
he says, takes vows and precepts with an eye to gaining some kind of  
personal advantage from doing so, while the latter takes them for the  
sake of helping the world as a whole. Here the terms are used to make  
an important distinction in motivation but without any reference at  
all to groups or sects or nikāyas as a whole. Moreover, the point is  
made clear that even if one does a good thing while motivated at least  
to some degree by self-interest, one is still doing a good thing. And  
doing a good thing is, well, a good thing to do.


Richard Hayes
Department of Philosophy
University of New Mexico
http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes
rhayes at unm.edu