• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Thoughts on Buddhism

arg-fallbackName="Laurens"/>
I think you're right in stating that Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion. Though sadly this is not a view held by many Buddhists I have encountered, they're more into prayer beads and incense than the core teachings.

I think the Buddha was all too aware of becoming worshipped as a religious figure, and there are a number of things that support this notion. The first being the Kalama Sutta, in which the Buddha instructs a group of people on the benefits of critically and sceptically thinking, especially when it comes to religious teachers. The Sutta can be found here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html
"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' , then you should enter & remain in them."

And the Buddha also instructed his followers specifically not to make statues of him, or any kinds of images, because I think he wanted the core of his teachings to be remembered, rather than himself as a person.

He also didn't appoint a successor when he died, to avoid any kind of over reliance upon leaders and the kinds of issues that it could raise.

It's just a shame that a lot of Buddhists spend time worshipping the Buddha these days rather than focusing on the core teachings. I think the Buddha was all too aware that he was becoming a religious figure and I'm not sure if that sat well with him.

Then again I could be completely mistaken.
 
arg-fallbackName="mirandansa"/>
Laurens said:
I think you're right in stating that Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion. Though sadly this is not a view held by many Buddhists I have encountered, they're more into prayer beads and incense than the core teachings.

I know what you mean. I lived in Japan, where i would sometimes come across these things:

butsudan_1.jpg


It's called Butsudan (literally "Buddha-shelf"), and it's believed to serve as some kind of mediation between the "living side" (kono-yo) and the "dead side" (ano-yo) so that the living people can pray for dead people especially their own ancestors. It shows an obvious influence from kamidana of Shinto:

Kamidana.jpg


But you don't find as many Butsudans in urban areas as in rural areas.

There are 13 main schools and 56 sub-schools of Buddhism in Japan, and many of them are a fusion with Shinto and therefore more myth-oriented and superstitious, typically worshipping idols like this Jizo:

SFZC_Jizo_statue.jpg


For those superstitious "Buddhists", the idea is basically that: if you pray to these things, you'll be "saved". So there is little recognition of Siddhartha's teachings on the nature of consciousness and the importance of psychological training such as meditation.

Even in Tibet, you'll find this:

prayer.jpg


At%20the%20prayer%20wheels.jpg


It's called "mani" or "prayer wheel" and contains some scriptural texts in it. The idea is again that: if you make it spin, it will automatically recite the prayers and you'll be "saved". Very superstitious.

I think the Buddha was all too aware of becoming worshipped as a religious figure, and there are a number of things that support this notion. The first being the Kalama Sutta, in which the Buddha instructs a group of people on the benefits of critically and sceptically thinking, especially when it comes to religious teachers. The Sutta can be found here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html
"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' , then you should enter & remain in them."

And the Buddha also instructed his followers specifically not to make statues of him, or any kinds of images, because I think he wanted the core of his teachings to be remembered, rather than himself as a person.

He also didn't appoint a successor when he died, to avoid any kind of over reliance upon leaders and the kinds of issues that it could raise.

It's just a shame that a lot of Buddhists spend time worshipping the Buddha these days rather than focusing on the core teachings. I think the Buddha was all too aware that he was becoming a religious figure and I'm not sure if that sat well with him.

Yes. There is big room for many self-proclaimed Buddhists to critically examine their belief for the very sake of Buddhism itself.
 
arg-fallbackName="mirandansa"/>
Kōans are Zen Buddhist dialogues/statements/questions whose meaning cannot be understood by rational thinking but may be accessible through intuition. Here's a famous one by Hakuin Eraku (1686-1769):

隻手 声 あり、その声を 聞け
Transliteration: sekishu koe ari, sono koe o kike
Literal translation: tally-hand voice (there-)is; that voice (do-)hear
Meaning: Two hands clap and there is a sound; what is the sound of one hand?

And here's a very interesting one by Là­njଠYà¬xuà¡n (?-866):

If you meet the Buddha, kill him.

The gist of this is that thinking about Buddha is delusion and does not lead to awakening. Since Buddha is the state of awakening itself, you can never become a Buddha by thinking about it. Awakening means the obliteration of all preconceptions including that of Buddha. One of the most influential Zen popularisers in the U.S. Suzuki Shunryu (1904-1971) commented:

Kill the Buddha if the Buddha exists somewhere else. Kill the Buddha, because you should resume your own Buddha nature.

Buddha is immanent. Its true nature corresponds to the very actuality of events and experiences. So, if you are seeing a Buddha as a perceptual object, that thing is never a Buddha. When you are -- without thinking that you are --, you are already a Buddha. A tree is because it just trees, not because it itself thinks that it is a tree. People are because they just people, not because they themselves think that they are people. Your heart beats not because you make it beat. "You" feel and cogitate not because "you" make "yourself" feel and cogitate but because electrochemicals etc. spontaneously do "you feeling and cogitating" in a particular region of the Cosmos. Things e-vent (out-come) when they (= the Cosmos) do. The same for Buddha. You e-vent as a Buddha when you do, not when you see one or when you think you are one.
 
Back
Top