Finding Common Ground Between the Theravada and Mahayana

[Sonam]

May I suggest a possibility for common ground?  Vajrayana explains rebirth as a process in which the "very subtle mind" (distinguishing between the gross mind, the subtle mind, and the very subtle mind) separates from the body at death, then enters the bardo to eventually find a rebirth.  Some Theravadans have said that the "very subtle mind" can be equated with the alaya vijnana, which carries over to a future rebirth. Can anyone add to this? Is there agreement on this point, or disagreement? Thank you.

[Karma Dondrup Tashi]

I am surprised it is a concept which appears in Theravada I thought it originated with Yogacara Buddhism.

[incognito]

Sonam, I've come across that a few times during discussions, because the alaya consists of all the seeds resulting from action, ect., though it's not something you hear a lot of Theravada practitioners speaking about. If I recall correctly, there were one or two postings at the New Buddhist Forum.

[Monkey Mind]

I'd forgotten about this thread... A couple of weeks ago I had an opportunity to meet with Ajahn Pasano, Thai Forest monk and abbot of the Abhayagiri Monestary in California. My current practice is in the Goenka/ U Ba Khin tradition, and I meet regularly with a Zen monk. Another person in this small group has an active Vajrayana practice. And there was a guy with a Japanese Pure Land practice. And some followers of a non-sectarian Western Buddhist movement. And a Dharma Punk. Come to think of it, no one in this small group represented the Thai Forest sect, except Ven. Pasano himself and three monks from his monastery. And once again, congruent with all of my "real world" Buddhist experiences, sect and tradition did not matter very much. The woman with the Vajrayana practice did not throw blood or spit at the Ajahn, the Pure Land guy did not storm out in a huff. Instead we had a very enthusiastic discussion about the Dharma/ Dhamma. Am I wrong in asserting (again) that this stuff only matters to Internet Buddhists?

[incognito]

I know what you mean, though it's proabably due to a lack of a physical relationship with an actually community in general, sometimes referred to as "arm-chair Buddhists".

That's not to say that the perception of discord is unwarranted in some instances, but this has more to do with spats between competing teachers than anything fundamental to any particular branch of the Buddhist tradition. A good example is the nonsense between a few of Japanese teachers in Los Angeles during the early 1930's, almost comical in nature when examined today.