Ive never really heard crtisism towards buddhism

[Jatheist]

Hmm, ok... But Theravada Buddhism is the oldest surviving sect and comes from early Buddhism. Yes, it's superstitious in Thailand, but Mahayana has more gods and Boddhisattvas and lots of devotion to Boddhisattvas. Also, Mahayana Buddhists see Busdha as a space being while Theravada Buddhists don't

[brimstoneSalad]

Hmm, ok... But Theravada Buddhism is the oldest surviving sect and comes from early Buddhism.

Nothing that old looks anything like its namesake.
Theravada, like Mahayana, has evolved over time. Trying to draw lines of canonical authority isn't a very fruitful exercise.

Yes, it's superstitious in Thailand, but Mahayana has more gods and Boddhisattvas and lots of devotion to Boddhisattvas.

That's actually one of the things that makes Mahayana less superstitious. Think about it: Being a Buddha isn't anywhere nearly as special and magical. As a state of 'enlightenment', it's something that many people can do, and also realize all of the time.

While you may see that as more gods = more superstition, you're making the mistake of equating quality and quantity.
The exclusivity claims which Theravada tends to actually deify Gautama more than the Mahayana do.

Like how Jesus is the one and only begotten son of god, one with the father?
The Greeks were not anywhere nearly as superstitious as that, despite saying left and right that people had god blood in their veins. It was just this thing they figured happened, and it wasn't all that special.
The Greek gods were much more human, much more flawed, much more plausible entities. That's not more superstitious, that's more logically possible, and more practical.

By elevating these things with exclusivity, and giving them special, absurd, logically impossible qualities like omniscience, omnipotence, etc. you make the whole belief system fundamentally less rational.

Also, Mahayana Buddhists see Busdha as a space being while Theravada Buddhists don't

I think you'll have to clarify what you mean there.

[Jatheist]

In Mahayana Buddhism, Buddha went to outer space and became a cosmic being that can be prayed to and venerated. Theravada Buddhism simply teaches that Buddha just died and became enlightened.

[Jatheist]

Buddha taught that prayer is useless, and Mahayana Buddhists and Thai Buddhists are ignoring it.

[brimstoneSalad]

Buddha taught that prayer is useless, and Mahayana Buddhists and Thai Buddhists are ignoring it.

Yes, a lot of them do. Although Mahayana are at least a little more likely to engage in action. Most (all that I know of, actually) Buddhist charity is founded on Mahayana, for example, because their belief is to follow the Bodhisattva path and alleviate suffering of other beings on Earth, while other schools of Buddhism are more self centered, and focused on locking themselves away and meditating for enlightenment to elevate themselves as quickly as possible and leave all the other suckers behind.

In Mahayana Buddhism, Buddha went to outer space and became a cosmic being that can be prayed to and venerated.

I don't know where you heard that. Can you possibly find me a link? I'd like to read about that.

[Jatheist]

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/bud ... -thera.htm

and

http://thoughtcatalog.com/noah-cicero/2 ... -buddhism/ (Where I actually heard it from)

Show me websites that show Theravada is more mystical than Mahayana

[brimstoneSalad]

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/bud ... -thera.htm

I don't see anything about it on that page. I wouldn't suggest taking very seriously their writings on Mahayana, though, they'll probably be biased. Or on anything, really. Like reading the Catholic encyclopedia about Protestantism.

Probably better to stick to Wiki, and third party sources.

http://thoughtcatalog.com/noah-cicero/2 ... -buddhism/ (Where I actually heard it from)

They're lumping in Tibetan Buddhism with Mahayana which has about as much to do with Mahayana as Mormonism has to do with Catholicism.

Tibetan Buddhism may be the most superstitious school there is, which derives from their centuries long theocracy in part.

They can't be strictly grouped like that.

Show me websites that show Theravada is more mystical than Mahayana

Mystical? I don't think I ever said it was more mystical. In terms of ritual, they're pretty similar looking.

The differences are in the philosophy, and the overall goal.

This is pretty typical of Mahayana groups: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzu_Chi

Good summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahayana

The Mahāyāna tradition is the largest major tradition of Buddhism existing today, with 53.2% of practitioners, compared to 35.8% for Theravāda and 5.7% for Vajrayāna in 2010.
[...]
It may also include the Vajrayāna Buddhist traditions of Shingon, Tendai and Tibetan Buddhism, which add esoteric teachings to the Mahāyāna tradition.

Note emphasis. More properly, there are three schools (at least), and four is better (Zen being another outlier).
Some people group in Vajrayana, but this is very imprecise at best.
It mixes in a bunch of esoteric teachings, that is, more superstitious.

Vajrayana is generally going to be your most superstitious school, and of course if you try to lump it with Mahayana that's going to make Mahayana look bad.

Mahayana Buddhists teach that enlightenment can be attained in a single lifetime, and this can be accomplished even by a layperson.

Mahayana is much more focused on regular people, which makes a big difference in practice. A lot of those points I already mentioned.