My question relates to the role of upaya in the Sutras because I'm wondering how much the teachings of Buddha can be said to be communicating what is true about reality versus communicating skillful means for pulling the arrow of dukkha out.
There is the old burning house story in the Lotus Sutra as a parable for pragmatism in teachers, but also the Mahayana relegated the Suttas of the "Hinayana" to being merely upaya because Buddha's listeners were not ripe to hear the full truth.
I'm curious to know in your opinion which of Buddha's teachings are actually true (in the philosophical sense of intended to communicate reality even if they themselves are only a finger pointing to the moon) versus which aspects of the dharma may be utilitarian and how one might tell the difference.
Gassho,
Andrew,
Satlah
There is the old burning house story in the Lotus Sutra as a parable for pragmatism in teachers, but also the Mahayana relegated the Suttas of the "Hinayana" to being merely upaya because Buddha's listeners were not ripe to hear the full truth.
I'm curious to know in your opinion which of Buddha's teachings are actually true (in the philosophical sense of intended to communicate reality even if they themselves are only a finger pointing to the moon) versus which aspects of the dharma may be utilitarian and how one might tell the difference.
Gassho,
Andrew,
Satlah
Comment