|
I think the clearest example of this is the development later of a number of different schools with differing beliefs and practices. A simple example of this would be schools that emphasised textual materials, but failed to practise Buddhist Dharma, and therefore were unable to personally experience and realise the true Dharma. Another way of looking at this arises from Buddha teaching his students according to their root capacities. The development of Hinayana and Mahayana highlight teachings which were given according to students' root capacities. This is even clearer when we talk in terms of Exoteric Buddhism as opposed to Esoteric Buddhism, and the secret teachings which are passed from Patriarch Master to Patriarch Master, outside of the sutras. Ultimately of course, the true teachings cannot be conveyed in writing but must be experienced and realised by each student through their individual practice. If the ultimate teachings of Buddha cannot be expressed or expounded in writing [and I believe this to be the case], be it sutra or any other written means, it follows with certainty that those teachings which are recorded in writings or sutras, are merely expedient teachings, and are an example of convenience, where convenience may be seen as a deliberate teaching strategy that a Holy Master adopts to lead a student to a higher level of understanding, so that eventually that student will be able to experience ultimate truth personally for themselves through their practice. |
|
|
|
|
