Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@newbuddhist.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take up to 48 hours. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Buddha is not guilty

Is Buddhism an invention of the followers of buddha? Can we see the bodhi tree in the forest of bodhi thoughts...? Can we know what buddha did really taught?

Comments

  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator

    The Buddha wasn't Buddhist, that we do know.
    As for the remainder, yes, yes, and eventually.
    But it takes practice.
    That's why it's called 'practice'.

    HozanSnakeskinFoibleFull
  • KeromeKerome Did I fall in the forest? Europe Veteran

    @Felino said:
    Is Buddhism an invention of the followers of buddha? Can we see the bodhi tree in the forest of bodhi thoughts...? Can we know what buddha did really taught?

    I think to a certain extent it bears the marks of the thoughts of followers. The origins of Mahayana for instance are not clear, or how the ideas of bodhisattva-hood came about. Nevertheless there is a lot of coherent, good thinking in the sutras, and that gives a good impression of what the Buddha truly taught.

    There are some interesting books out there on this subject - that I have heard of - I will get around to reading them eventually.

    Snakeskin
  • BunksBunks Australia Veteran

    Some would say the Pali Canon is EXACTLY word for word what the Buddha taught but I’m not so sure.....

    Snakeskin
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran

    Is Buddhism an invention of the followers of buddha?

    No, Buddhism is an invention of Buddhas.

    lobsterCarlitaSnakeskin
  • SpinyNormanSpinyNorman It's still all old bollocks Veteran

    @Felino said:> Is Buddhism an invention of the followers of buddha?

    Most certainly, and it's complicated further by the fact that there are many different schools of Buddhism. These are the result of adaptation to different cultures, and influences from other religions like religions like Bon and Taoism.

    Snakeskin
  • ShoshinShoshin No one in particular Nowhere Special Veteran

    @Felino said:
    Is Buddhism an invention of the followers of buddha?

    I'm under the impression Buddha's discourses were put together by his followers over many years...

    That is, Dharmas put together for those wishing to be awake from the dream AKA Western terms "Buddhism" ...So yes I guess the term was invented to describe the Buddha's Dharma... Philosophy, Spiritual path,. Way of life. The True Nature of Things...
    (But I could be wrong...Not that it matters much in the scheme of things)

    Can we see the bodhi tree in the forest of bodhi thoughts...?

    Ehipassiko

    Can we know what buddha did really taught?

    Ehipassiko

    DavidSnakeskin
  • CarlitaCarlita Riding the waves! United States Veteran
    edited November 8

    @Felino said:
    Is Buddhism an invention of the followers of buddha? Can we see the bodhi tree in the forest of bodhi thoughts...? Can we know what buddha did really taught?

    No. The Dhamma is life. The Buddha realized it fully. He taught monks then laity how to practice it. It's not practices of The Buddha but Practice of The Dhamma. Buddhism is a practice of realization already existing rather than invented.

    What else would The Buddha teach that we would consider The Dhamma? Do you think The Buddha's realization defines the The Dhamma or The Dhamma defines The Buddha's realization?

    Snakeskin
  • FelinoFelino Portugal New

    What is the dharma? Sutras? Teachings? Can you know who was the author?

    Snakeskin
  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator

    Does it matter? It's not what is said, it's what is done.
    What your conclusion is, is your affair.

    SnakeskinCarlita
  • BunksBunks Australia Veteran

    Spot on @federica - sometimes I think "Maybe the Buddha didn't live and his life story is made up" but then realise it doesn't matter.

    Someone (or someone's) presented these teachings. Does it matter who it was?

    dhammachickSnakeskinlobster
  • DavidDavid some guy The Hammer in Ontario, Canada, eh Veteran

    That's one of the nice things about Buddhism. The message speaks for itself and doesn't depend on being spoken by an authority figure or divine being.

    BunksSnakeskinCarlita
  • @Felino said:
    What is the dharma?

    You are. o:)

    Sutras?

    What you have not digested. O.o

    Teachings?

    What is known, when we stop being clever. :p

    Can you know who was the author?

    As others have said. Why does it matter. :) <3

    So ... as you are the dharma ... what have you learned? Oh and welcome ... <3

  • FelinoFelino Portugal New

    Federica... Seeing for oneself is in contradiction with following what other people says...with following the dammas without questioning their origin their truth ...I must say I'm in Buddhism for many years...I read your comments without believing you...belief in authority prevents true seeing... The to see for yourself...right?

  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited November 9

    I never said ehi Passiko. Apparently though, the Buddha did.

    If your cup's too full of tea, I don't expect you'll get any more fresh brew in.

    dhammachickDhammaDragonHozan
  • dhammachickdhammachick crazy Aussie BUJU Sydney, Australia Veteran

    @Felino said:
    Federica... Seeing for oneself is in contradiction with following what other people says...with following the dammas without questioning their origin their truth ...I must say I'm in Buddhism for many years...I read your comments without believing you...belief in authority prevents true seeing... The to see for yourself...right?

    So if you’re an expert, what are you doing here???

  • DhammaDragonDhammaDragon Carpe Diem switzerland Veteran

    ^^^Actually, I cannot even make sense of all that speech...
    What? Where? Who?
    I need more coffee... :p

  • personperson Where is my mind? 'Merica! Veteran

    The authenticity of the teachings origin has little to do with how true they are. If the Buddha's teachings hadn't existed for 2,500 years and some random person developed them and posted them exactly as they already are on his blog the truth of them would be exactly the same.

    That they have been around and followed for so long lets us see and gives us confidence that the effort involved produces the promised results.

    lobsterShoshinSnakeskinDavid
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran

    @person said:
    The authenticity of the teachings origin has little to do with how true they are. If the Buddha's teachings hadn't existed for 2,500 years and some random person developed them and posted them exactly as they already are on his blog the truth of them would be exactly the same.

    True. Although, I don't see how some deluded people could have developed a path to the end of suffering when they themselves have not ended suffering. That's almost like someone giving you the first map to the west coast, when they have never been to the west coast to begin with! That makes no sense! People draw maps after they have been there, not before!

    CarlitaSnakeskin
  • CarlitaCarlita Riding the waves! United States Veteran
    edited November 9

    The Dhamma exists without The Buddha. However, The Buddha was the first to realize this already existing truth. If The Buddha was not important than why follow The Dhamma. Thats like taking someone's dish, eating it, and wondering how to make one of your own without reading the recipe.

    Of course once we read the recipe given not invented, we are on our own. No one makes it for you. The purpose of the recipe isnt for someone to make the dish for you but for you to make it yourself.

    But if you have no one to write the recipe and half of us dont come from an oral tradition passed down, then we would be just looking at ingredients we dont know how to use.

    I mean, many people who dont have the recipe try to make the dish on their own. If The Buddha is The Chief, why would he not be important?

    He doesnt replace the recipe (we dont worship the cook) but gives what he learned for us to make it ourselves.

    The Buddha
    The Dhamma
    The Sangha

    All three are important.

    Snakeskin
  • karastikarasti Breathing Minnesota Veteran

    They are important, I think, until you know how to cook without recipes. You remember what you learned, but you don't need to grasp the recipe card so much anymore. You might refer to it once in a while, but you can go it alone quite well.

    CarlitaSnakeskin
  • DavidDavid some guy The Hammer in Ontario, Canada, eh Veteran
    edited November 9

    @Carlita said:
    The Dhamma exists without The Buddha. However, The Buddha was the first to realize this already existing truth. If The Buddha was not important than why follow The Dhamma. Thats like taking someone's dish, eating it, and wondering how to make one of your own without reading the recipe.

    Of course once we read the recipe given not invented, we are on our own. No one makes it for you. The purpose of the recipe isnt for someone to make the dish for you but for you to make it yourself.

    But if you have no one to write the recipe and half of us dont come from an oral tradition passed down, then we would be just looking at ingredients we dont know how to use.

    I mean, many people who dont have the recipe try to make the dish on their own. If The Buddha is The Chief, why would he not be important?

    He doesnt replace the recipe (we dont worship the cook) but gives what he learned for us to make it ourselves.

    The Buddha
    The Dhamma
    The Sangha

    All three are important.

    Nobody is saying the Buddha isn't important I don't think.

    The point I see being made is that the Buddha waking in Sidhartha was not because he was special but because of conditions he brought together. Conditions that didn't depend on him being anything more than human.

    So if for some reason it turns out that Sidhartha was not the one that really taught the dharma, it was still Buddha.

    Snakeskin
  • CarlitaCarlita Riding the waves! United States Veteran

    @David said:

    @Carlita said:
    The Dhamma exists without The Buddha. However, The Buddha was the first to realize this already existing truth. If The Buddha was not important than why follow The Dhamma. Thats like taking someone's dish, eating it, and wondering how to make one of your own without reading the recipe.

    Of course once we read the recipe given not invented, we are on our own. No one makes it for you. The purpose of the recipe isnt for someone to make the dish for you but for you to make it yourself.

    But if you have no one to write the recipe and half of us dont come from an oral tradition passed down, then we would be just looking at ingredients we dont know how to use.

    I mean, many people who dont have the recipe try to make the dish on their own. If The Buddha is The Chief, why would he not be important?

    He doesnt replace the recipe (we dont worship the cook) but gives what he learned for us to make it ourselves.

    The Buddha
    The Dhamma
    The Sangha

    All three are important.

    Nobody is saying the Buddha isn't important I don't think.

    The point I see being made is that the Buddha waking in Sidhartha was not because he was special but because of conditions he brought together. Conditions that didn't depend on him being anything more than human.

    So if for some reason it turns out that Sidhartha was not the one that really taught the dharma, it was still Buddha that it could turn out he may not give The Dhamma instruction?

    Like saying what if the chief didnt exist as the chief (mudane; not important; not elightened), there would still be a meal.

    How would we think he could not be the one to bring The Dhamma? Who else was Buddha (or enlightened) before The Buddha

    Snakeskin
  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator

    That - we don't know. All we know is that the Buddha was.

  • DhammaDragonDhammaDragon Carpe Diem switzerland Veteran

    @Felino said:
    What is the dharma? Sutras? Teachings? Can you know who was the author?

    Buddhadhamma is the teaching of Siddharta Gautama, the Buddha.
    That is, the insights he gained as he became enlightened.

    Sutras are the different scriptures in which those teachings have been collected.
    The authors are the different members of the council that gathered some hundred years after the Buddha passed away.
    They have attempted to put into writing as faithfully as humanly possible teachings that had been passing down orally till then.
    The consistency and agreement in the general gist of the teachings makes us surmise that what has come down to us more or less represents what the Buddha actually taught.

    Buddhists are better off than Christians who read King James version of the Bible, which is based on poor, incomplete and even fake translations of Jesus teachings.
    Laotzu's Tao-Te-Ching has also undergone different translations and misinterpretations, as well as Greek philosophers works, Hindu sacred books... you name it.

    But then, this is Buddhism 101, so I sit here wondering why we are here doing the homework for you, @Felino, while your participation in the thread has been almost non-existent.
    I mistrust people who hurl a stone and hide the hand.

    Snakeskinperson
  • ShoshinShoshin No one in particular Nowhere Special Veteran

    @Felino said:
    What is the dharma? Sutras? Teachings?

    The "Dharma"

    The "Sutras & Teachings"

    Can you know who was the author ?

    Who wants to know ? (This is not a trick question :) )

  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited November 9

    Well I believe Buddha said he taught the cessation of suffering. So that's what we are looking for. If some words are hard to translate even so we know what we are looking for from the words that are speaking to us and talking to us about suffering.

    On the other hand: https://tricycle.org/magazine/i-teach-only-suffering-and-end-suffering/

    Snakeskin
  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited November 9

    I read half-way - but the article then fades out, unless a person subscribes.... and right now? Right now I'd just for once like to read something without having a ton of conditions attached... :angry:

    Ok, rant over.... :)

    Snakeskin
  • DavidDavid some guy The Hammer in Ontario, Canada, eh Veteran
    edited November 9

    @Carlita said:

    @David said:

    @Carlita said:
    The Dhamma exists without The Buddha. However, The Buddha was the first to realize this already existing truth. If The Buddha was not important than why follow The Dhamma. Thats like taking someone's dish, eating it, and wondering how to make one of your own without reading the recipe.

    Of course once we read the recipe given not invented, we are on our own. No one makes it for you. The purpose of the recipe isnt for someone to make the dish for you but for you to make it yourself.

    But if you have no one to write the recipe and half of us dont come from an oral tradition passed down, then we would be just looking at ingredients we dont know how to use.

    I mean, many people who dont have the recipe try to make the dish on their own. If The Buddha is The Chief, why would he not be important?

    He doesnt replace the recipe (we dont worship the cook) but gives what he learned for us to make it ourselves.

    The Buddha
    The Dhamma
    The Sangha

    All three are important.

    Nobody is saying the Buddha isn't important I don't think.

    The point I see being made is that the Buddha waking in Sidhartha was not because he was special but because of conditions he brought together. Conditions that didn't depend on him being anything more than human.

    So if for some reason it turns out that Sidhartha was not the one that really taught the dharma, it was still Buddha that it could turn out he may not give The Dhamma instruction?

    Like saying what if the chief didnt exist as the chief (mudane; not important; not elightened), there would still be a meal.

    No, it's like saying that if the chef wasn't who we thought it was, the meal would still be the meal and have the same taste.

    This is why we don't worship the chef. It puts the recipe out of our reach so we will never get it right.

    Do you suppose the Buddha can only awaken in Sidhartha Gotama?

    dhammachick
  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator

    Simply put - finger, moon.

    David
  • @federica sorry about the article fading out. Here is a full passage from Thich Nhat Hanh instead:

    "I have been looking for you, my child, Since the time when rivers and mountains still lay in obscurity. I was looking for you when you were still in a deep sleep. Although the conch had many times echoed in the ten directions.Without leaving our ancient mountain I looked at distant lands And recognized your steps on so many different paths.
    Where are you going, my child? There have been times when the mist has come And enveloped the remote village but you are still Wandering in far away lands. I have called your name with each breath,Confident that even though you have lost yourWay over there you will finally find a way back to me.

    Sometimes I manifest myself right on the path You are treading but you still look at me as if I were a stranger You cannot see the connection between us in our Former lives you cannot remember the old vow you made. You have not recognized me Because your mind is caught up in images concerning a distant future. In former lifetimes you have often taken my handand we have enjoyed walking together. We have sat together for a longtime at the foot of old pine trees. We have stood side by side in silence for hours Listening to the sound of the wind softly calling us And looking up at the while clouds floating by.You have picked up and given to me the firstred autumn leaf And I have taken you through forests deep in snow.

    But wherever we go we always return to ourAncient mountain to be near to the moon and stars To invite the big bell every morning to sound,And help living beings to wake up. We have sat quietly on the An Tu mountain’ with the Great Bamboo Forest Master Alongside the frangipani trees in blossom. We have taken boats out to sea to rescue the boat people as they drift. We have helped Master Van Hanh design the ThangLong capital we have built together a thatched hermitage, And stretched out the net to rescue the nun Trac Tuyen When!

    The sound of The rising tide was deafening On the banks of The Tien Duong river.Together we have opened the way and steppedInto the immense space outside of space. After many years of working to tear asunder the net of time. We have saved up the light of shooting stars And made a torch helping those who want to go home After decades of wandering in distant places. But still there have been times when theSeeds of a vagabond in you have come back to life you have left your teacher, your brothers and sisters Alone you go…I look at you with compassion Although I know that this is not a true separation (Because I am already in each cell of your body) And that you may need once more to play the prodigal son.

    That is why I promise I shall be there for youAny time you are in danger. Sometimes you have lain unconscious on the hot sands of frontier deserts.I have manifested myself as a cloud to bring you cool shade. Late at night the cloud became the dew And the compassionate nectar falls drop by drop for you to drink. Sometimes you sit in a deep abyss of darkness Completely alienated from you true home. I have manifested Myself as a long ladder and Lightly thrown myself downSo that you can climb up to the area where there is light To discover again the blue of the sky and theSounds of the brook and the birds.Sometimes I recognised you in Birmingham, In the Do Linh district or New England. I have sometimes met you in Hang Chau, Xiamen, or Shanghai I have sometimes found you in St. Petersburg or East Berlin. Sometimes, though only five years old, I haveSeen you and recognized you.

    Because of the seed of bodhchita, you carry in your tender heart. Wherever I have seen you, I have always raised My hand and made a signal to you,Whether it be in the delta of the North, Saigon or the Thuan An Seaport. Sometimes you were the golden full moon hanging Over the summit of The Kim Son Mountain, Or the little bird flying over the Dai Laoforest during a winter night. Often I have seen you But you have not seen me, Though while walking in the evening mist your clothes have been soaked.But finally you have always come home.

    You have come home and sat at my feet on our ancient mountain Listening to the birds calling and the monkeysScreeching and the morning chanting echoing from the Buddha Hall. You have come back to me determined not to be a vagabond any longer. This morning the birds of the mountain joyfully welcome the bright sun. Do you know, my child, that the white cloudsAre still floating in the vault of the sky? Where are you now? The ancient mountain is still there in thisPlace of the present moment. Although the white-crested wave still wants toGo in the other direction, Look again, you will see me in you and in every leaf and flower bud. If you call my name, you will see me right away. Where are you going? The old frangipani tree offers its fragrant flowers this morning. You and I have never really been apart. Spring has come. The pines have put out new shining green needles And on the edge of the forest, the wild Plum Trees have burst into flower."
    ~Thich Naht Hahn

    David
  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited November 9

    I found this article.... I would respectfully suggest that those who may be of a sensitive disposition, stop reading at this point:

    ...."What else' I exclaimed 'could the Buddha possibly teach?' "

    The article contains the following, most pertinent statement:

    ...."And when I had understood this, the Buddha's statement, Pubbe cāham bhikkhave etarahi ca dukkhañ c'eva paññāpemi dukkhassa ca nirodham ('Both now and formerly, monks, it is just suffering that I make known and the ceasing of suffering') (M. 22: i,140)..."

  • federicafederica seeker of the clear blue sky Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator

    Here you are, @Felino , plod your way through this lot too....

  • CarlitaCarlita Riding the waves! United States Veteran

    @karasti said:
    They are important, I think, until you know how to cook without recipes. You remember what you learned, but you don't need to grasp the recipe card so much anymore. You might refer to it once in a while, but you can go it alone quite well.

    I think maybe its more once we get to the point we dont need the recipe, we still thank the cook and off > @David said:

    @Carlita said:

    @David said:

    @Carlita said:
    The Dhamma exists without The Buddha. However, The Buddha was the first to realize this already existing truth. If The Buddha was not important than why follow The Dhamma. Thats like taking someone's dish, eating it, and wondering how to make one of your own without reading the recipe.

    Of course once we read the recipe given not invented, we are on our own. No one makes it for you. The purpose of the recipe isnt for someone to make the dish for you but for you to make it yourself.

    But if you have no one to write the recipe and half of us dont come from an oral tradition passed down, then we would be just looking at ingredients we dont know how to use.

    I mean, many people who dont have the recipe try to make the dish on their own. If The Buddha is The Chief, why would he not be important?

    He doesnt replace the recipe (we dont worship the cook) but gives what he learned for us to make it ourselves.

    The Buddha
    The Dhamma
    The Sangha

    All three are important.

    Nobody is saying the Buddha isn't important I don't think.

    The point I see being made is that the Buddha waking in Sidhartha was not because he was special but because of conditions he brought together. Conditions that didn't depend on him being anything more than human.

    So if for some reason it turns out that Sidhartha was not the one that really taught the dharma, it was still Buddha that it could turn out he may not give The Dhamma instruction?

    Like saying what if the chief didnt exist as the chief (mudane; not important; not elightened), there would still be a meal.

    No, it's like saying that if the chef wasn't who we thought it was, the meal would still be the meal and have the same taste.

    This is why we don't worship the chef. It puts the recipe out of our reach so we will never get it right.

    Do you suppose the Buddha can only awaken in Sidhartha Gotama?

    Well. I wouldnt say it matters if The Buddha was John Doe. The only key thing is whomever the person would need to be enlightened to be The Buddha. Maybe Buddhist from Buddhist cultures would be more sensitive to this question than one not raised in it. Maybe.

    lobsterDavid
  • ShoshinShoshin No one in particular Nowhere Special Veteran

    Buddha is not guilty
    Is Buddhism an invention of the followers of buddha? Can we see the bodhi tree in the forest of bodhi thoughts...? Can we know what buddha did really taught?

    "Great Faith and Great Doubt are two ends of a spiritual walking stick. We grip one end with the grasp given to us by our Great Determination. We poke into the underbrush in the dark on our spiritual journey. This act is real spiritual practice -- gripping the Faith end and poking ahead with the Doubt end of the stick. If we have no Faith, we have no Doubt. If we have no Determination, we never pick up the stick in the first place."

    ~Sensei Sevan Ross~

    lobster
Sign In or Register to comment.