Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Are dogmatic views of Buddhism dangerous?
santhisouk
Veteran
I have heard some people say some interesting things about their ideas about what Buddhism is, and sometimes unbelievable things. For example believing that there could be many Buddhas living in our society today. Could this kind of idea hurt Buddhism as a whole? There was a guest speaker on this show that had said just that.
http://www.pbs.org/thebuddha/
http://www.pbs.org/thebuddha/
0
Comments
As to your more general question, hopefully there are enough realized teachers to counter some of the degradation that is inevitable as the Dharma moves to the west.
If you read Stephen Batchelor's "Confession of a Buddhist Atheist", in which he tells about his experiences in Tibetan and Korean monasteries, you'll see why he defines some Buddhist traditions as dogmatic. The teachers he studied under required belief in rebirth, for example. Some Buddhism is dogmatic. Though some teachers are more flexible than others. But TB teachings say that the circumstances of our current life are all determined by our past life deeds. Another bit of dogma that many (at least on this forum) reject. If some people have "dogmatic views" of Buddhism, it's because that's the way they've been taught. They've learned their lessons well, from the perspective of their teachers. Why would it be dangerous, though? It's simply the way it is. If you don't agree with some of the teachings, look for a tradition that suits you better. Or study on your own. Some people on this forum have combined elements from a variety of Buddhist traditions.
That’s Buddhism.
If people see “Buddha” as something very distant, as something which really hasn’t anything to do with their ordinary human life; they just turn Buddhism into some kind of worship.
They worship monks and statues.
That’s a harmless way of having fun, so I have no problem with it.
But the real challenge is to step up and be the Buddha today in whatever it is you are doing.
Obviously this is just one man's take.
"dangerous" in what way, santhisouk? You mean, because they may (and sometimes do) turn people off to Buddhism? I'm still trying to understand where you see potential danger, what kind of danger.
If its true or a trick of the mind does not matter. Whether you see the repulsive character traits as coming from a bodhisattva or a stuck and suffering journeyer, you renounce the qualities of perception that make their words and actions about yourself, or qualities that are permanent. It could be said that way I guess. Again, it might be closer to notice that ideas of any kind are imperfect tools, and yet Buddhist tools point toward something that is beyond them. Describing them as inherently false is misleading, because in Buddhism it is quite well observed that the words are tools only, not a doctrine of new mental fixations.
It's not quantity after all that matters, it's quality...(so I have heard)
The question is to what extent people allow their religion's dogma to influence their behavior.
The Catholic Church is probably the worst in that regard because they still excommunicate people...although rarely nowadays. But to be honest, most Catholics go to Mass when they want to, ignore most Holy Days Of Obligation, and pay little attention to what the Pope says. A good example of that is abortion...which most Catholics still oppose, versus birth control...which most Catholics do what they want.
In mainstream Protestant churches here in the States, anyone can go into the service, sit there and agree or not on what is being said, participate or not (no questions asked) in things like communion, and you don't even have to be an actual member of the church.
Buddhism has been that free for much longer. But, there is still dogma. Read all the posts in this forum, and you can fairly quickly begin to determine which of us is more or less dogmatic.
I feel that with Buddhism the emphasis is more on keeping an open mind in order to observe what's really going on.
Spiny
What I like about the Buddha's teaching framework, and that of the major established traditions, is that there is a little better chance ,that those whom enter the folds of Buddhism (and any associated frameworks) have a slightly better chance to also move out of it at the end of the day. I believe that is when Buddhism is truly alive, and only living, breathing people can make that really happen in the human world.