Sutras and Warnings...

budding_flower

Reading the Lotus Sutra the other day I came across to a kind of warning from the Buddha to Sariputra I think, where the Buddha asks him not to disclose the Sutra to the unprepared, because if they ridiculed the Sutra, they would be reborn to the lowest hell and be reborn and reborn again in that hell for many kalpas etc. etc.

No although I am not a Buddhist 'fundamentalist', (if such a think exists, but thinking about the reaction of a Buddhist friend when I made a joke about Maitreya, I think they exist), doesn’t it feel creepy, and foreboding to read about all this warnings? It's like reading the Old Testament, not that I compare them, but the 'you will be reborn to hell if you ridicule the Sutras... buhahahaha'.

Just wondering, even though I try to put as much logic to my feelings as possible and not get attached to them. What are your thoughts...?

davemerk

This only makes me think about how someone must seek out the buddha not buddhist seeking out others to become buddhists. In that perspective it shouldn't be an issue anyways for other people. Haha that's all I got.

budding_flower

seeker242

doesn’t it feel creepy, and foreboding to read about all this warnings? It's like reading the Old Testament, not that I compare them, but the 'you will be reborn to hell if you ridicule the Sutras... buhahahaha'.

Think of it this way, If you ridicule the idea that "sensual pleasures lead to suffering" or "killing is bad karma" which is what the sutras say, then you will probably end up in hell, yes.

genkaku

The Hindus, who seem to have a better sense of humor than Buddhists, tell the tale of a student who went to his teacher to receive his mantram, the bit of text that will guide and inform a student's practice. The teacher gave the student a mantram and then warned him not to reveal it to anyone. "If you revealed this mantram, the whole world would be saved," he said.

The student promptly went down to the town square, gathered as many people as he could, and told them his mantram. Even a cursory view of history informs us that the whole world was not saved, or, if it was, it was a poor sort of salvation.

There is something to be said for choosing your audience and choosing your words carefully. Gautama himself tailored his words to his various audiences. But since all words have the potential to cause as much vexation as light -- since people will always step in one pile of dog shit or another -- about the best any of us might learn is not to take words too seriously.

aMatt

about the best any of us might learn is not to take words too seriously.

I don't agree. If we silence our mind there is plenty of space to let in the context of the audience. The best we can do is speak more skillfully... more contextually alert. So rather than teaching the DO to a new buddhist (or my favorite mistake "your pain is empty, ignore it"), we can simply observe the "pile of dog shit" their foot is smushing and speak mindfully about it.

genkaku

about the best any of us might learn is not to take words too seriously.

I don't agree. If we silence our mind there is plenty of space to let in the context of the audience. The best we can do is speak more skillfully... more contextually alert. So rather than teaching the DO to a new buddhist (or my favorite mistake "your pain is empty, ignore it"), we can simply observe the "pile of dog shit" their foot is smushing and speak mindfully about it.

@amatt -- If we "silence our mind," which is already silent by nature, there will always be more noise than silence. Some words I always liked from Dai O Kokushi's "On Zen" are:

Wishing to entice the blind,
The Buddha has playfully let words
Escape his golden mouth.
Heaven and earth have ever since
Been filled with entangling briars.

"Playfully" is a pretty instructive word. Of course it might be better not to use it in public.

Talisman

about the best any of us might learn is not to take words too seriously.

I don't agree. If we silence our mind there is plenty of space to let in the context of the audience. The best we can do is speak more skillfully... more contextually alert. So rather than teaching the DO to a new buddhist (or my favorite mistake "your pain is empty, ignore it"), we can simply observe the "pile of dog shit" their foot is smushing and speak mindfully about it.

I very frequently make the mistake of trying to explain DO to someone interested in the teachings .... ALWAYS

I've been working really hard on developing a way of introducing people to the Buddhist belief system in a way that isnt downright overwhelming. The 4 noble are small, but even they can be difficult for many people to understand. I've tried explaining the 8-fold path, but there are too many "folds" and people are easily distracted. I'm thinking of sticking with the "8-fold summary": Buddhism is practicing and perfecting Wisdom, Morality, and Concentration. Simple enough?

person

@Talisman Yeah, I think when trying to explain Buddhism to the uninitiated its best to stick to the general purpose rather than get into the details of the teachings. For example, stop doing harm, learn to be kind, purify the mind.

Vincenzi

those warnings aren't on the Pali Tripitaka, just on mahayana sutras... AFAIK.

compassionate_warrior

Is that really in the Lotus Sutra? I find that hard to believe. In the Pali sutras, the Buddha says he has disclosed everything, there are no secret teachings. If the warning is really in there, it shows that the Lotus Sutra was a later development and likely didn't come from the Buddha. And how much sense does it make to have those warnings in there, when the sutra was fairly widely reproduced and distributed or taught, even back in the day, let alone now, with mass publishing?

Talisman

The Lotus Sutra has many ... peculiarities. It is common practice, however, in many Mahayana traditions to withold discussion regarding emptiness, dependent origination, not-self, etc. with novices so as not to confuse or frighten them.

compassionate_warrior

@Talisman Thank you for your frankness and insight. This makes sense, in view of what one member who had spent much time in Tibetan communities in the Himalayas said: so many monks and nuns had wrong ideas about karma, attachment, and other concepts, that this (former) member returned from her studies very confused. So it seems that the warning in the text might just be more along the lines of advice, that beginners should begin at the beginning. As we have so often said on this forum to beginners: The 4 Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, the precepts. They do get confused by some of the more complex concepts.

ihbryant

The central theme of the first part of the Lotus Sutra is skillful means. It says that how you present Buddhism to people is important. Taken out of context that line does seem extreme; however, the idea behind it is discussed at great lengths in the sutra.

I am really uncomfortable with the way many people will pick one line out of a sutra and determine by examination of that line one without any context whatsoever whether it is in line with the Buddha's teaching.

Vincenzi

@ihbryant

it is still a later text...

aMatt

@genkaku
If we "silence our mind," which is already silent by nature, there will always be more noise than silence. Some words I always liked from Dai O Kokushi's "On Zen" are:

Wishing to entice the blind,
The Buddha has playfully let words
Escape his golden mouth.
Heaven and earth have ever since
Been filled with entangling briars.

"Playfully" is a pretty instructive word. Of course it might be better not to use it in public.

Silent by nature? Are you sure? Unless you're challenging the word silent (sub empty, focused, still, luminous, bodhicitta)? Minds are usually restless when we encounter them in human society, often ruminating over phenomena it experiences.

Saying "silent by nature" reminds me of "your pain is empty, ignore it" and shows well the warning in the sutra. True isn't enough, it has to be skillful/helpful to say.

Saying Buddha's words were playful might be confusing, because they weren't whimsical or careless. In the context of his poem, its beautiful.

Jeffrey

CW did you read genkakus first post?

Talisman, you are right its actually a part of the bodhisattva vows not to confuse people with views on emptiness without the support of the full path which you could give to them. My teacher says emptiness is like dynamite. It can remove obstacles, but is itself dangerous.

Dakini

Well, you all have been helpful in putting that warning into context. I can see it was probably intended to be constructive. HOWEVER: was the bit about being reborn endlessly into hell realms really necessary? Isn't that overkill? I'm really getting turned off by that sort of thing.

Talisman

It's called Hyperbole.

Talisman

Hyperbole ( /haɪˈpɜrbəliː/ hy-pur-bə-lee;[1] Greek: ὑπερβολή, 'exaggeration') is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech. It may be used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally.

ihbryant

I think you just have to realize that it was the literary style of the era. I find the introductory portion of many Mahayana sutras where all of the special people and beings are listed out as tiresome.

But like the talk about hell realms, that is the style rather than the substance. There is substance there, or nobody would be reading them 2000 years later. Personally, I enjoy reading sutras more than commentaries on them, but I realize that they can really help to understand what the thoughts behind the sutras are.

budding_flower

The central theme of the first part of the Lotus Sutra is skillful means. It says that how you present Buddhism to people is important. Taken out of context that line does seem extreme; however, the idea behind it is discussed at great lengths in the sutra.

I am really uncomfortable with the way many people will pick one line out of a sutra and determine by examination of that line one without any context whatsoever whether it is in line with the Buddha's teaching.

@ihbryant you are right about me picking a line from a Sutra and starting a thread, but I didn't have the intention to color the whole Sutra with that warning. I love the Lotus Sutra, and I admit I haven't yet read it all (I'm getting there though) and surely am not trying to say that I am an expert on Sutras... I just wanted the opinion of others about the warnings on the Sutra. Thnx though all of you for your post, but it still feels creepy...

compassionate_warrior

CW did you read genkakus first post?
.

Yes, but frankly, I didn't get it. Why?

Jeffrey

Oh I got a lot from it I thought you might get the same. I said ahha when I read this line:

"But since all words have the potential to cause as much vexation as light."

So in hearing that you will go hell without reading the sutra doesn't make sense really. So one must just let that line roll off the back. Well thats a choice. But it is appropriate to not over react.

If you go to hell depends on the purity of your motivation. If you have a good intention you won't go to hell.

Amelia

Well, you all have been helpful in putting that warning into context. I can see it was probably intended to be constructive. HOWEVER: was the bit about being reborn endlessly into hell realms really necessary? Isn't that overkill? I'm really getting turned off by that sort of thing.

I am thinking that the "hell realms" can also, and have been, interpreted as states of mind.

Amelia

...And states of living.

compassionate_warrior

Well, you all have been helpful in putting that warning into context. I can see it was probably intended to be constructive. HOWEVER: was the bit about being reborn endlessly into hell realms really necessary? Isn't that overkill? I'm really getting turned off by that sort of thing.

I am thinking that the "hell realms" can also, and have been, interpreted as states of mind.

I can see how it does might like a bit of fundamentalist Christianity inserted into a Buddhist text, though. I'm not used to a Buddhism that threatens people with eternal hell and damnation, lol!

Vincenzi

@Amelia @Dakini

even if the can be interpreted as such, asuras and devas are actual living beings.

budding_flower

For me these beings exist only in the human mind and earthly realm, they can be felt as real but for me they ain't (ups my New agie part just poped out )...