purest? don't know. the most fundamentalist.no doubt about that.the Buddha didn't teach Buddhism ,he taught Dhamma/Dharma. so essential truths are there no matter what "school" of Buddhism is practiced. it's up to the practitioner to see Thur the garbage(in themselves and what is outside).
I follow Tibetan Buddhism so there may be some differences in terminology. We must remember that H.H. the Dalai Lama teaches that all traditions of Buddhism ultimately lead to the same end?enlightenment.
Of the three main traditions (Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana), however, the Vajrayana tradition (also known as the Diamond Vehicle or tartaric) is said to enable one to attain enlightenment faster than either of the other two; it is the tradition most associated with Tibetan Buddhism. It must be understood, however, that one cannot "jump over" any one of the traditions but will be lead through all three schools.
Most religions, especially those like Tibetan Buddhism, may be viewed on two levels: a simplistic surface layer and a deeper more hidden aspect. We need to remember the historical time in which these Teachings were made and the people to whom they were presented.
I would like to use as an analogy the structure and peeling of an onion. I apologize if this comparison may be offensive to some but it's the best example I can think of to use in my explanation. This analogy is, I feel, well within the lam rim teachings of Tibetan Buddhism.
In "Steps on the Path to Enlightenment: A Commentary on Tsongkhapa's Lamrim Chenmo" the Tibetan scholar Geshe Lhundub Sopa maintains there are four types of people who occupy the human realm. Included in these four types are three levels of seekers on The Path. These four types are: ordinary beings whose goals are limited solely to this life; special persons of small scope seeking a spiritual goal concerned with their next life; people of intermediate spiritual scope seeking personal release from samsara; persons of great spiritual scope who concentrate on achieving Buddhahood and helping sentient beings rather than helping themselves. This is further evident in the concept of the three vehicles of Buddhism taught in Tibetan Buddhism: The Lesser Vehicle (Theravada), The Greater Vehicle (Mahayana), and The Diamond Vehicle (Vajrayana).
Those who live solely for the pleasures of human existence are like the outermost layer of the onion. The inner elements are there but they are covered by the outer protective covering. They are intent and content with personal existence and its material pleasures. Perhaps, at some future time they will be able to pursue a more spiritual life but that is questionable realizing, according to Tibetan Buddhism, the difficulty of re-attaining human birth.
Some people occupy the initial phase in their belief development are the next layer of my hypothetical "onion." This is not necessarily bad or demeaning since it establishes the individual and provides him/her an anchor and a beginning point in their "religious" (a poor choice of words but I think you understand my intent) odyssey. It's similar to a child taking his/her first steps. No more is revealed than what is essential and necessary for the devotee to "handle" at this initial phase of their practice.
As the neophyte gains insight and shows him/herself to be confident in their belief and ready for deeper instruction, layers of our symbolic "onion" are removed to reveal a less obvious layer of the mystical. Again, no more is revealed that the individual can assimilate. It has the attributes of the previous layer and does not negate its teaching but enhances and further develops it. The "onion" still exists but, upon closer inspection, it becomes evident that, as each layer is removed the onion becomes subtly smaller -- more concentrated, if you will.
The more the devotee comprehends and internalizes, the more layers are removed. The inner workings and symbolism are further revealed by removing each layer and thus the smaller and more concentrated the Teaching becomes. Each stage is unique and relevant. One does not contradict the other but only enhances it as a continuum and further develops the Teaching. In this way one passes through each of the three stages. Some may go through one stage more quickly than another but each passes through the three phases. In this way there are no "holes" in the initiate's understanding of The Teaching. It is in this manner historically and even presently that Tibetan Buddhism is traditionally taught.
According to the texts that I have read, one passes through each of the various traditions on his / her journey on the path so there is no "one" tradition that is more "pure" than the next. All paths lead eventually to enlightenment and one will pass through each of the stages in attaining enlightenment. One cannot go from point A to C without passing through point B. How long one remains at any one stage depends upon the individual.
In "The Steps on the Path to Enlightenment A Commentary on Thsonkhapas's Lamrim Chenmo Volume 1: the Foundation Practices" (Wisdom Publicatons) explains there are three types of persons corresponding to the three traditions mentioned above: small, intermediate and great spiritual persons. Don't interpret these terms as being demeaning or condescending. Each of us must pass through successive phase in succession in order to reach the next stage. You may remain at one stage longer or for a shorter period than another person but each stage will be passed through.
You cannot skip one stage anymore than you can attain walking upright as a child without first crawling and standing. How long a child will remain at any one of these stages will depend upon the individual but one cannot skip entirely any stage in one's physical development. Neither can one skip a stage in one's path to enlightenment.
"In the lamrim method all the Buddhist scriptures and teachings are organized into instructions for the different capacities of these three spiritual individuals. They are divided according to the scope of the goal that each is seeking....So there are three Buddhist religious goals for the persons of three spiritual capacities. First is the temporal goal of a good rebirth within samsara free from lower rebirths. Second is the higher goal of seeking your own emancipation from samsara. Third is the highest goal: seeking the emancipation of others....Are there really three paths with three completely, divergent goals? No. It is not the case that one path leads this way, one path leads that way, and one leads a third way. The three paths of the three types of persons follow from one to another; each path leads to the one that follows after it. Of course, the highest goal of the three is perfect enlightenment, the goal of the superior spiritual person. But a spiritual teacher has to guide disciples through the path of intermediate scope in order to lead to that point. And in order to lead students to practices of the intermediate spiritual person, the teacher must guide them through the practice of the small spiritual person....In other words the lower two paths are actually included in the highest one. All three of these persons share a part of the path in common....without going through these two preliminary paths you cannot get to the Mahayana path. You have to start from the common basis; you cannot just jump to the highest level of practice."
As the initiates continue in their studies and development, and demonstrated their ability to receive and understand further instruction, subsequent layers are removed revealing a deeper and more esoteric meaning to the belief until the innermost structure is revealed. It's this center which we strive to reach in Buddhism.
This is how I view Tibetan Buddhism of the Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana tantric traditions. It is also why I so strongly encourage people to find a Spiritual Teacher to assist them in their learnings.
I apologize for the length but I hope this is answers your question in some small measure.
purity is an image, a discrimination. it is formed by a desire to follow the best teachings. perfectly understandable, yet misconceived. why is that? there is no such thing as best teachings, because 'best' itself is an image and a discrimination either. remember, skying did not have any schools or Buddhist teachers to guide him to liberation, nevertheless, he achieved it.
therefore, before placing this question before your mind, you need to decide whether you seek liberation or adhering a particular tradition/practice. if the first, the tradition and practice does not matter while you have the result. if the latter, pick the school you like best - all are time proved to demonstrate that any of them is fine to follow.
A few hundred years after the Buddha's passing away, there arose eighteen different schools or sects all of which claimed to represent the original Teachings of the Buddha. The differences between these schools were basically due to various interpretations of the Teachings of the Buddha. Over a period of time, these schools gradually merged into two main schools: Theravada and Mahayana. Today, a majority of the followers of Buddhism are divided into these two schools.
Basically Mahayana Buddhism grew out of the Buddha's teaching that each individual carries within himself the potential for Buddhahood.
Theravadins say that this potential can be realized through individual effort. Mahayanists believe that they can seek salvation through the intervention of other superior beings or gods called Bodhisattas. According to them, Bodhisattas are future Buddhas who, out of compassion for their fellow human beings, have delayed their own attainment of Buddhahood until they have helped others towards liberation. In spite of this basic difference, however, it must be stressed that doctrinally there is absolutely no disagreement concerning the Dhamma as contained in the sacred Tripitaka texts. Because Buddhists have been encouraged by the Master to carefully inquire after the truth, they have been free to interpret the scriptures according to their understanding. But above all, both Mahayana and Theravada are one in their reverence for the Buddha.
The areas of agreement between the two schools are as follows:
Both accept Sakyamuni Buddha as the Teacher.
The Four Noble Truths are exactly the same in both schools.
The Eightfold Path is exactly the same in both schools.
The Pattica-Samuppada or teaching on Dependent Origination is the same in both schools.
Both reject the idea of a creator God.
Both accept Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta and Sila, Samadhi, Panna without any difference.
Some people are of the view that Theravada is selfish because it teaches that people should seek their own salvation. But how can a selfish person gain Enlightenment?
Both schools accept the three Yana or Bodhi and consider the Bodhisatta Ideal as the highest. The Mahayana has created many mystical Bodhisattas, while the Theravada believes that a Bodhisatta is a man amongst us who devotes his entire life for the attainment of perfection, and ultimately becomes a fully Enlightened Buddha for the well-being and happiness of the world.
*The terms Hinayana (Lesser Vehicle) and Mahayana (Greater Vehicle) are not known in the Theravada Pali literature. They are not found in the Pali Canon (Tripitaka) or in the Commentaries on the Tripitaka.
Theravada Buddhists follow orthodox religious traditions that had prevailed in India two thousand five hundred years ago. They perform their religious services in the Pali language. They also expect to attain the final goal-Nibbana-by becoming a Supreme Enlightened Buddha, Pacceka Buddha, or an Arahant-the highest stage of sainthood. The Majority of them prefer the Arahantahood. Buddhists in Sri Lanka, Burma, and Thailand belong to this school.
Mahayanists have changed the old religious customs. Their practices are in accordance with the customs and traditions of the countries where they live. Mahayanists perform their religious services in their mother tongue. They expect to attain the final goal-Nibbana-by becoming Buddhas. Hence, they honor both the Buddha and Bodhisatta (one who is destined to be a Buddha) with the same respect. Buddhists in China, Japan and Korea belong to this school. Most of those in Tibet and Mongolia follow another school of Buddhism which is known as Vajrayana. Buddhist scholars believe that this school inclines more towards the Mahayana sect.
It is universally accepted by scholars that the terms Hinayana and Mahayana are later invention. Historically speaking, the Theravada already existed long before these terms came into being. That Theravada, considered to be the original teaching of the Buddha, was introduced to Sri Lanka and established there in the 3rd century B.C., during the time of Emperor Asoka of India. At that time there was nothing called Mahayana.
Mahayana as such appeared much later, at the beginning of the Christian era. Buddhism that went to Sri Lanka, with its Tripitaka and Commentaries, in the 3rd Century B.C., remained there intact as Theravada, and did not come into the scene of the Hinayana-Mahayana dispute that developed later in India. It seems therefore not legitimate to include Theravada in either of these two categories. However, after the inauguration of the World Fellowship of Buddhists in 1950, well-informed people, both in the East and in the West, use the term Theravada, and not the term Hinayana, with reference to Buddhism prevalent in South-east Asian countries. There are still outmoded people who use the term Hinayana. *In fact, the Samdhi Nirmorcana Sutra - a Mahayana Sutra clearly says that the Sravakayana - the Theravada, and the Mahayana constitute one Yana-ekayana - and that they are not two different and distinct 'vehicles'! Although different schools of Buddhism held different opinions on the teaching of the Buddha, they never had any violence or blood shed for more than two thousands years. This is the uniqueness of Buddhist tolerance.
Metta (loving-kindness; loving-friendliness) to all.
Is Theravada the purest form of Buddhism taught by Buddha?
