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.
Superstition in Buddhism
Buddhism seems to be very steeped with myths, legends, and superstition. I do not mean this in a negative way, but more in a scholarly sense. Much of Eastern Buddhism has beliefs in literal rebirth/reincarnation, beliefs in Cosmic Bodhisattvas and devas, telepathy and other "magic" powers, among many other beliefs.
If someone were to want to follow Buddhism, would it be wrong on them to disregard these beliefs? Or, would that stop Buddhism from really being "Buddhism," if you know what I mean.
Thanks.
If someone were to want to follow Buddhism, would it be wrong on them to disregard these beliefs? Or, would that stop Buddhism from really being "Buddhism," if you know what I mean.
Thanks.
0
Comments
examination, scrutiny, analysis and questioning are the order of the day... and if something doesn't sit well with you, either put it aside for now, or discard it as not your bag.
there are some aspects of Theravada i find it difficult to follow; there are many aspects of Tibetan Buddhism I can't get my head around at all... and Pure-land Buddhism and chanting Namo Amitabha, or Zen Buddhism, are simply - not for me.
That doesn't make them invalid, inconsequential or wrong.
for some, they are the path to follow.
and that's ok.
The Buddha
The self-consistent Buddhist cosmology which is presented in commentaries and works of Abhidharma in both Theravāda and Mahāyāna traditions, is the end-product of an analysis and reconciliation of cosmological comments found in the Buddhist sūtra and vinaya traditions. No single sūtra sets out the entire structure of the universe. However, in several sūtras the Buddha describes other worlds and states of being, and other sūtras describe the origin and destruction of the universe. The synthesis of these data into a single comprehensive system must have taken place early in the history of Buddhism, as the system described in the Pāli Vibhajyavāda tradition (represented by today's Theravādins) agrees, despite some trivial inconsistencies of nomenclature, with the Sarvāstivāda tradition which is preserved by Mahāyāna Buddhists.
The picture of the world presented in Buddhist cosmological descriptions cannot be taken as a literal description of the shape of the universe. It is inconsistent, and cannot be made consistent, with astronomical data that were already known in ancient India. However, it is not intended to be a description of how ordinary humans perceive their world[citation needed]; rather, it is the universe as seen through the divyacakṣus (Pāli: dibbacakkhu), the "divine eye" by which a Buddha or an arhat who has cultivated this faculty can perceive all of the other worlds and the beings arising (being born) and passing away (dying) within them, and can tell from what state they have been reborn and into what state they will be reborn. The cosmology has also been interpreted in a symbolical or allegorical sense (see Ten spiritual realms).
Buddhist cosmology can be divided into two related kinds: spatial cosmology, which describes the arrangement of the various worlds within the universe, and temporal cosmology, which describes how those worlds come into existence, and how they pass away.
Or take this link as there is a hell of a lot to read through with regards to buddhist cosmology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_cosmology
@B5C hits it - its very similar to other global faiths - take Islam for example - the central work is the Koran - this is intricate and subtle poetry supposedly written by an illiterate man - the Koran itself proposes enlightenment in its own way - the concept and path set out there is not incompatible with say the Buddhist way - there is one theme of teaching from the prophet himself (apparently) that states he is nothing, he is not to be followed or venerated, his grave is to be unmarked - that the Koran is the word of God and each person should look to their heart in interpreting what the word of God means to them.
That said, there are a greater weight of works such as the Hadiths and interpretations of Islamic scholars and various saints of different traditions - they go on to spell out a whole heap of rules from how you should dress, what punishments are for crimes, even how to wipe your @ss after a shit (citing every eventuality!!) - these works also incorporate beliefs that clearly go back to Sumerian times (and incorporate Sumerian concepts of social administration) - there is also a body of work from the Sufi and Dervish background that sets out a different approach to the Hadiths and 'mainstream' beliefs - strangely, it is like a completely different religion (but when read with the Koran it is closer to the Koran than the established dicta) - even the area where the Kaaba stone is now is known to have been used for worship long before Islam.
In the times where these religions commenced, religion and politics were pretty much the same thing - he who had God's ear and spoke God's word was a canditate to rule on Earth - I also think of The Life of Brian where he is running away and drops his gourd and then his shoe and different sects venerating each are created there and then and pretty soon theyre fighting each other over who is right!
The message overall from the Buddhist tradition is profound and wonderfully inspiring - I dont feel it needs the chanting, the beads, the incense, the gongs, the monestaries or robes etc to make it any more than it is - man vs divine I guess!!
Someone once asked a zen master "What happens after you die?" He said "I don't know, I haven't died yet!" Notice he didn't say "this" or "that" or "nothing". He said I don't know. "I don't know" is quite appropriate IMO.
That said the most important thing is whether whatever you believes helps or hinders you in becoming a kinder person and transforming your mind.
And like @seeker242 said if there isn't complete proof one way or the other its good to not cling to whatever the belief is too tightly. Just say this is what I believe but I don't know for sure.
If I were a great meditator, for example, I could use a rock as the object of meditation just as effectively as a statue or image of the Buddha. But for me, the image of the Buddha is more inspiring and also helps me generate a sense of love and compassion, because of my own history and my own feelings about Buddhism. So for me, it feels more effective than a rock. But a Christian friend (or anyone else) may look at my meditation practice and say, "Oh, you're worshipping an eastern pagan idol." Or a fellow Buddhist may even ask, "Why do you need what is obviously a pre-Buddhist image adopted into Indian Buddhism and then further mixed up with Tibetan indigenous culture."
Cultural legacy is inherent in all forms of Buddhism, and it's hard to say whether something is "mixed up" with Buddhism or simply historical imagery. If the cultural trait seems to go against what you feel is a Buddhist belief, then that would be a good sign for you personally not to use that imagery in your practice. However, that same cultural trait might have no effect, or might even enhance, someone else's practice.
Unless we have the misfortune to be born blind or deaf, Buddhism will always have sound and imagery from a culture; it's simply a question of which culture.
The myth of a man who ended all suffering.
He talked about his previous lives and predicted the coming
of future Buddhas.
Do you believe all that?
No, I don't believe everything in the history of Buddhist thought. But among the various writings and stories and myths is a lot of wisdom worth seeking out.
Okay, folks, start throwing stones!
I believe it's possible to gain an awareness of past lived. What I don't believe in are embellishments such as the Buddha being born of a virgin.
Though I think it's good to keep an open mind, because disbelieving things is really not the point either.
http://arrowriver.ca/dhamma/faith.html
"You're not a REAL (Christian or Buddhist or Muslim or American or Conservative or Liberal or whatever) unless you believe (insert creed here).
To answer your real question, no you are not alone and millions of Buddhists including entire schools of Buddhism are firmly planted in realty and don't believe in literal reincarnation or literal Hells or gods. We love the rich history and diversity of practice in Buddhism but see all this as a byproduct of the mind's desire to make sense of the world around them combined with a human imagination.
Within Buddhism, we don't have much of a problem with diversity of beliefs, because we know it's not what's important in defining a Buddhist. To those outside in the West, I suppose they have a muddled picture of the Dalai Lama as the Pope and a bunch of bowing to a statue and ceremony with pictures of scary figures on the temple walls and that's Buddhism to them.
Spiny
That is why Zen schools are sometimes refered to as "transmission outside of sutras".
If there is a Unitarian Universalist group near you, they might have someone involved in the UU Buddhist Association.
Ive had certain experiences which to me confirm the validity of Buddha's teachings. Even a Brief insight into emptiness can help piece together some of the more supernatural aspects of Buddha's teachings. Plus there is a lineage of accomplished practitioners whom have shown their selves to be trust worthy in their vows their knowledge and own personal non deluded insight into these things.
Michael Scott