In the past, there was a temple in Zhejiang that meditated, but no one supported it later, and the policy required commercialization, which did not last long. But Yunnan has always been the territory of the south, and there should be. Then go to the forum at the top of the forum to ask, or add some QQ groups, observe first, chat and then join. Spreading to the south is also the right path of Buddhism, and you can get rid of it after learning it. It is a good idea to study Buddhism in the south, but in the end we have to go back to childhood. In particular, spreading knowledge in the south, attacking Mahayana, hurting Mahayana people, engaging in religious opposition and factional struggle are all against the national law and cannot go to extremes. Remember. Turn an article to deepen your impression of Mahayana, Hinayana and Buddhism. Personally, I think this article is very useful, and it will be useful for you to learn Buddhism in the future.

Some doubts about Southern Buddhism Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism

Text/Zhou Shuji Lu Man

Southern spread, because its Buddhist base is in southern India, is called Southern spread. And the seat, this is just a good name given by Nanchuan. In order to respect each other, we also call it attendance. In fact, before the branch appeared, the attendance department had already divided the cadres, so it was hard to say who really represented the attendance department. However, it is difficult to say who is right and who is wrong before the division between the seating department and the masses. It can only be said that history has chosen division and most people have chosen the mass sector, which is the choice of the historical trend. After the split between the upper seat and the public seat, the upper seat split several times. This is also a historical choice, from which we can see that the original superior position is no longer suitable for human development. Gradually withdraw from the historical stage. At this time, no one said that it was "non-Buddhism" between ministries, but only the understanding of Buddhist content, and everyone had differences. So who is the authentic Buddhism? It's hard to say. The division of Buddhist sects is like a fertilized egg, which splits from one cell into two, from two to four, and finally grows into a person. Well, if you go back and ask now, it's hard to say which cell in this person is the original fertilized egg. According to the theory of Buddhism itself, no cell is related to the original fertilized egg, but only life and death. As the "truth" recognized by various Buddhist sects, the theory of selflessness can be measured here. Whoever thinks that he is still the original seat, and who still thinks that he is the lineal blood of primitive Buddhism or the Buddha himself, violates the principle of Buddhism without self. Because deep down, they still believe that "after countless parts, there is still an eternal' my department'." This idea of "owning me" is everywhere in Southern Buddhism today. Explaining with Southern Buddhism's own legal meaning is self-holding, and explaining with Mahayana Buddhism is popularizing the law. Therefore, this also involves a problem: when the monks who preach Buddhism in the south take their own sects as the main vein, they criticize other sects and even vilify Mahayana, don't they see it? Although he no longer insists that the body and his five senses are me, he has moved his insistence on the concept of "I" to a bigger place or a more dangerous place? Does this mean that the fruit position of those who criticize other ministries and pretend to be the official version and the orthodox version should be re-measured?

Since things are developing and changing, there can be no eternal "self-law" or "self-law". So, is it allowed to be superficial, chaotic or even extinct? According to the principle of Buddhism itself, there is extinction when there is life, and almost every school has words that predict the extinction of Buddhism. Although the content is not the same, it can be regarded as a serious interpretation and understanding of the law of birth and death. Therefore, this involves an academic issue. A knowledge or culture, Buddhism certainly belongs to a culture, a religious culture, a philosophical culture or a Zen culture. In a word, Buddhism can be regarded as a culture. If academic categories are not established, it is foolish to define academic categories only by whether they believe in Buddhism or not. Because Buddha said a lot when he was alive, do we have to learn every word? What is certain is that even what Sakyamuni himself said is not all Buddhism. Only part of what Sakyamuni himself said was Buddhism. This involves the definition of Buddhism. It can be said that although Buddhism has experienced many divisions, there have also been many exchanges between various sects, which eventually formed the classic works of their respective sects. Since it is an exchange or an argument, there must be an intersection. There are still some core parts in these classics. These core parts are generally regarded as the academic categories of Buddhism, such as impermanence, suffering, selflessness, nirvana, extinction, origin, causality, etc ... Those who meet these basic rules can be regarded as Buddhas. This is why schools have been arguing for thousands of years, and they have never said anything that the other party has not said, because once an academic field is determined to deviate from the academic category, there is no need to argue, that is, physics will not argue with mathematics, and chemistry will not argue with literature. The definition or words of "non-Buddhism" attacking a certain faction are not on the table. This is just an insult, a kind of play theory.

Is it necessary to restore the original teachings of the Buddha? How to recover? Is it better than we thought after recovery? This is a common anxiety within the Buddhist community at present. But think again, suppose the original teachings of the Buddha are restored in a grotto now, or is there any way to go back to the Buddha's time, what will happen? There will still be "ten illegality", will there be a split between the Ministry of Public Affairs and the Ministry of Mass Affairs, and there will be countless splits in the future? History will always repeat itself, which is the essential attribute of human nature. Think about it this way, and you will understand that we have no choice but to respect the choice of history.

Well, since Buddhism is not a rigid imitation of Sakyamuni's words and deeds, but has its own academic category, there is a problem. Besides synthesizing the classics of various schools and picking out the same parts, is it necessary to have different parts? To what extent does it need to exist? Judging from the disputes and discussions between different sects in the past dynasties and the inherent laws of human cultural units, it is generally believed that it is beneficial to improve this kind of academic literature. For example, mathematics, more than two thousand years ago, mathematicians participated in the calculation with negative numbers, which was opposed by some people because they could not agree that negative numbers were also numbers with their own practical experience. However, it was later found that negative numbers solved many inconvenient problems in calculating natural numbers, so mathematicians agreed that negative numbers were also mathematics. Understand this truth, then it can be explained that many people attacked the southern spread of Abituo Fa Lun, saying that this theory claimed to be said by the Buddha in thirty-three days. This myth can only show that this theory is not a Buddhist theory, but is forged by later generations. In other words, Pure Daoism is not credible because it is a book with a sense of sound. Learning such a book is tantamount to denying that you are not a Buddhist but a dharma or a sense of sound. Such an argument can be easily solved after we know what the category of Buddhism is. On Amitabha is a very valuable paper in the field of Buddhism, even if it is not Buddhism. Why do you say that? Because this theory perfects the system of "mind method" and "color method" in Agama, Agama has been emphasized and integrated in the system, and his explanation of practice is clearer and more perfect, which can stand the challenge of heretics and the test of human wisdom. Therefore, we can confidently say that Adamo Buddhism is Buddhism!

But did Abifa really improve the teaching method of the Buddha? Is it really perfect?

Here we go back to the end of 19 century. At that time, many scientists in the field of physics were extremely satisfied with the rigor of classical physics, thinking that the development of physics had reached its peak and all problems had been solved. Almost all phenomena in nature can be accurately explained by existing theories. Force, heat, light, electricity, magnetism ... physics seems perfect, and the basic principles have been discovered. Some people even claim that physics is over, but some people know that there are two dark clouds floating in the brilliant sky of classical physics, one is Michelson and Morey's experiment, and the other is the problem of blackbody radiation. These two problems have brought serious problems to the establishment of classical physics. The final solution of these two problems, one gave birth to Einstein's theory of relativity, and the other gave birth to quantum physics, which triggered a brilliant physics revolution at the beginning of the 20th century and profoundly influenced our times.

A similar phenomenon seems to appear in Buddhism, especially in Buddhism who is seated at the table. The theoretical system of Upper Seats Buddhism is based on Abbey Method. Many people who study Buddhism are amazed at the rigorous theoretical system constructed by Abidharma. Some people think that it transcends everything, accurately explains all the phenomena of birth and death of color, name and body and mind, and establishes a strong theoretical basis for liberation. Abidharma's position in the southern spread is even higher than the scripture, which is considered to be said by the Buddha in heaven and is an extremely superior method. However, in the sky of the strict Buddhist theoretical system based on Adamo, there are actually several dark clouds floating, and these dark clouds have been floating for more than 2000 years.

First of all, the first dark cloud is: since everything is impermanent and there is no self, why can't the karma information of past lives be disordered, and why can't this person's karma be returned to others? According to the classics, the actions and words of past lives led to karma in this life. Then, after the body, mouth and heart of the previous life disappeared, where was the karma in this life before it rose?

The second dark cloud is: Nirvana as fate and the relationship between Nirvana and the five connotations on this basis. Who has a relationship with Nirvana after the extinction of the five aggregates? Buddhism believes that all beings are five aggregates. So after the extinction of the five aggregates, is this person nirvana? If not nirvana, what is the difference between this person and the fly ash annihilation after suicide? It's just that you have found Nirvana, a tool beyond the five connotations, to help them disappear. If the five aggregates have not become something else after being destroyed, what is this thing? If the five aggregates are completely destroyed and nothing is achieved, what is the difference from the extinction theory?

The third dark cloud is: there are distractions and thoughts alternate. The break between the mind and the mind is distraction. Obviously, Abidharma's theory holds that distraction is also life and death, so there is a question, what is distraction and distraction? Is it broken? If it's broken, it's still extinction.

The third dark cloud is: when nirvana is the destination, there is only one destination, and that is nirvana. Then there is a problem: all mental methods are not me, and Buddhism defines me as a single component, inseparable, self-sufficient and eternal. Then there is a problem. Since this fate is unique, can it be divided again? If we can divide again, we are still in life and death, and the theory of nirvana liberation is deceptive; If it can't be divided, is Nirvana essentially stable? If it changes, it's still a matter of life and death. If we don't change, it is God and I who have violated the law of selflessness.

The fourth dark cloud is: Nanchuan believes that when nirvana is the fate of entering a fixed environment, there is only one fate, and that is nirvana. Nanchuan cannot explain clearly here. Is this the only fate? Is it extreme greed? If it's not greed, how can it be so exclusive? They don't know these things. If the Mahayana doctrine of the mean is not used, then the so-called Mahayana nirvana cannot be proved to be a saint, because in the eyes of people in this world, saints cannot have too strong greed. This is almost an understanding of the whole world culture.

The fifth dark cloud: Arahant nirvana was destroyed except for five points, and of course the other nine evil thoughts derived from these five points were also destroyed. But in fact, the unkindness in Abidharma can't sum up all the unkindness of human beings, even if "treacherous, firm, cowardly, false, illusory ……" mentioned in the scripture is destroyed? If there is no extinction, how can there be saints?

The sixth dark cloud is: Where did you go after Nirvana? Where does Nirvana come from and where does it end? Can you move? Is it common to stay still? How to move? Is it broken?

The seventh dark cloud is that when the first view of wisdom is proved, the feeling of the body disappears and the name color is discovered. Is this an illusion? After several wise observations, it is proved that Nirvana is extinct. Is it crazy to play hallucinations? None of these can be solved by one book, Amitabha and Agama, and Mahayana Buddhism can also solve them.

Judging from the above loopholes, it is difficult to justify the spread of Buddhism in the south. If you don't rely on the teachings of Mahayana Buddhism, you can't stand it as long as you have a little philosophical foundation. So in a sense, Mahayana is an indispensable part of Buddhism, and from the perspective of the whole eastern culture, Mahayana is one of the main pillars of eastern culture.