Catatan Buddhisme Tibet kapan ? lebih tua dari Konsili ke-IV Theravada ?
Lebih tua kan klaim sendiri? Dan tidak ada hubungannya dengan keaslian sekte lain.
Gini ya, di sejarah dunia dan Tibet, dan ini sudah diakui global, ada seorang guru dari India namanya Atisha, dia berlayar ke Sriwijaya dan belajar dengan seorang guru namanya Dharmakirti, orang Indonesia. Setelah itu Atisha kembali ke India, dan kemudian diundang ke Tibet. Ia menyebarkan dharma dan meninggal di Tibet. Atisha kira-kira datang sekitar tahun 1013 ke Sriwijaya, belajar 11 tahun disana.
Setelah itu, Agama Buddha di India lenyap karena invasi muslim.
Sebelum lenyapnya, kitab-kitab yg ada dibawa dan diterjemahkan ke Tibet dan China (yg di afghan dan kashmi musnah).
Nah, dari kitab-kitab ini mereka semua mencatat Konsili ke-1 dan ke-2, dan konsili ke-3 di Kashmir.
Dan diketahui dari perjalanan I-tsing, Fa-hien, Atisha, bahwa dunia buddhis waktu itu gak terisolasi. Ke Indonesia aja sampe apalagi Sri Lanka. Kalau memang ada konsili yang sebegitu pentingnya di abad pertama Masehi, kok tak terdengar ke India ataupun pusat dharma lainnya. Apalagi konsili ke-3 kalau memang itu terjadi di masa Asoka.
Semua sekte buddhis mempunyai catatan tentang Asoka, tapi hanya Theravada yg mengatakan Asoka mengadakan konsili.
Artinya apa? Artinya itu kan klaim sepihak. Coba deh, ada Bhiksu Gunawarman, dia lahir di Kashmir, keliling India, belajar ke Sri Lanka, pergi ke Jawa dan membuat raja jawa memeluk buddhis, lalu ke china jadi guru kaisar.
http://www.gbm-online.com/online/dharma/hm9.htmlItu tahun 400an. Kalau memang benar ada konsili ke-3 Asoka, pastinya cerita itu nyebar dong kemana-mana. Kalau gak nyebar, artinya itu ditolak kan? Karena apa? karena sektarian kali ya?
Mengenai Raja Kanishka dan konsilinya, catatan Xuan Zang (Yuan Chuang) menyebut:
This
king of Gandhara, Yuan-chuang tells us, in the four hundredth year after the decease of Buddha, was a great and powerful
sovereign whose sway extended to many peoples. In his leisure hours he studied the Buddhist scriptures, having a monk every
day in the palace to give him instruction. But as the Brethren taught him different and contradictory interpretations, owing to
conflicting tenets of sectarians, the king fell into a state of helpless uncertainty. Then the Venerable Parsva explained to
His Majesty that in the long lapse of time since Buddha left the world disciples of schools and masters with various theories
had arisen, all holding personal views and all in conflict. On hearing this the king was greatly moved, and expressed to PSrsva
his desire to restore Buddhism to eminence, and to have the Tripitaka explained according to the tenets of the various
sohools. Parlva gave his cordial approval of the suggestion, and the king thereupon issued summonses to the holy and wise
Brethren in all his realm. These came in crowds from all quarters to Gandhara, where they were entertained for seven
days. They were far too numerous, however, to make a good working Council, so the king had recourse to a process of
selection. First all had to go away who had not entered the saintly career— bad not attained one to the four degrees of per-
fection. Then of those who remained all who were arhats were selected and the rest dismissed; of the arhats again those who
had the "three-fold intelligence" and the "six-fold penetration" were retained ; and these were further thinned out by dismissing
all of them who were not thoroughly versed in the Tripitaka and well learned in the "Five Sciences". By this process the
number of arhats for the Council was reduced to 499.
Yuan-chuang goes on to tell that the king proposed Gandhara as the place of meeting for the Council, but that this place was
objected to on account of its heat and dampness. Then Rajagaha was proposed, but Parsva and others objected that there
were too many adherents of other sects there, and at last it was decided to hold the Council in Kashmir. So the king and
the arhats came to his country, and here the king built a monastery for the Brethren.
When the texts of the Tripitaka were collected for the making of expository Commentaries on them, the Venerable Vasumitra
was outside the door in monk's costume. The other Brethren would not admit him because he was still in the bonds of the
world, not an arhat. In reply to his claim to deliberate, the others told him to go away and come to join them when he
had attained arhatship. Yasumitra said he did not value this attainment a spittle — he was aiming at Buddhahood and he
would not have any petty condition ("go in a small path") ; still he could become an arhat before a silk ball which he threw in
the air fell to the ground. When he threw the ball the Devas said to him so as to be heard by all — Will you who are to
become Buddha and take the place of Maitreya, honoured in the three worlds and the stay of all creatures — will you here realize
this petty fruit? The Devas kept the ball, and the arhats made apologies to Yasumitra and invited him to become their President,
accepting his decisions on all disputed points.
This Council, Yuan-chuang continues, composed 100 000 stanzas of Upadesa sastras explanatory of the canonical sUtras, 100000
stanzas of Vinaya-vibhasha-Sastras explanatory of the Vinaya, and 100 000 stanzas of Abhidharma-vibhasha sastras explanatory
of the Abhidharma. For this exposition of the Tripitaka all learning from remote antiquity was thoroughly examined; the
general sense and the terse language [of the Buddhist scriptures] were again made clear and distinct, and the learning was widely diffused for the safe-guiding of disciples. King Kanishka had the treatises, when finished, written out on copper plates, and
enclosed these in stone boxes, which he deposited in a tope made for the purpose. He then ordered the Yakshas to keep
and guard the texts, and not allow any to be taken out of the country by heretics; those who wished to study them could do
so in the country. When leaving to return to his own country Kanishka renewed Asoka's gift of all Kashmir to the Buddhist
church.
http://archive.org/stream/onyuanchwangstr00wattgoog/onyuanchwangstr00wattgoog_djvu.txt
Kalau baca sekilas catatan Xuanzang, dia mendengar cerita ini di Kashmir itu sendiri dan melihat vihara yg dibangun raja Kanishka beserta plakat pendiriannya, dan tahunnya juga diperkirakan Abad ke-1 Masehi.
Inilah klaim sepihak dari Sarvastivada
Klaim-klaim sepihak lainnya sulit dilakukan karena kebanyakan sejarah sekte lain sudah musnah
NEXT, tentang penggusuran oleh sekte Mahavihara terhadap sekte lain di Sri Lanka
the Mahāvihāra gained the political support of King Parakkamabāhu I (1153-1186 CE), and completely abolished the Abhayagiri and Jetavana Theravāda traditions.[11][12] The Theravāda monks of these two traditions were then defrocked and given the choice of either returning to the laity permanently, or attempting re-ordination under the Mahāvihāra tradition as "novices" (sāmaṇera).[12][13] Richard Gombrich writes that many monks from the Mahāvihāra were also defrocked:[14]
Though the chronicle says that he reunited the Sangha, this expression glosses over the fact that what he did was to abolish the Abhayagiri and Jetavana Nikāyas. He laicized many monks from the Mahā Vihāra Nikāya, all the monks in the other two – and then allowed the better ones among the latter to become novices in the now 'unified' Sangha, into which they would have in due course to be reordained.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahavihara
Kalau gak begitu, mana mungkin bhikkhu yang jumlahnya ribuan dari sekte lain tiba2 hilang semua kan?