Burning off fingers, and other Buddhist practices.

Cinorjer

As we follow our modern Buddhist practices or read the ancient sutras and ponder what "authentic" Buddhist teachings are, it's important to understand that Buddhist practice has evolved greatly over the centuries. Let me illustrate with some fascinating Buddhist history.

Everyone should be aware that the Japanese Zen schools of Soto and Rinzai both came from Masters who studied in China and learned the Chan teachings and practices, returning to establish schools in the 11th and 13th century, respectively. But Chan in China continued to evolve, and in the 17th century Chinese monks came to Japan and established the Obaku school, and the differences between early Chan and the Chan of 300 years later is striking. For one thing, Buddhism in China had continued to evolve in the mother country and introduced mortification of the flesh and rejection of the world as an important element in the practice. In particular, writing sutras in one's own blood was highly praised, as was being sealed into a solitary cell for years at a time, burning incense on the top of one's head to leave scars, and most fascinating, deliberately burning off one's finger as a sacrifice.

An early account tells how it was done. A thin piece of twine was tightly tied around the base of the little finger, and then the hand was buried in mud with only the finger sticking out. Then the finger was smeared with resin and burned like a candle. And the ancient writings praise this as a sign of devotion that will transfer merit and work off karma. Likewise, the copying of sutras in your own blood was highly praised as a way to transfer merit.

Now, we might (one can hope) see this as an outlandish practice that fails the "middle way" test, but to the people of the time, it symbolized something profound about their commitment. The Zen monks already in Japan, by the way, had a few critical words to say about these practices brought over from China.

So when we pontificate about the "authentic" Buddhism or what Buddha really taught, don't neglect to consider that history has shown there is no Buddhist practice, then or now, that will not seem crazy to future Buddhists. That includes our own practice that we consider oh-so-modern and enlightened.

http://kanji.zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~wittern/data/nw-fs/fs-baskind.pdf
http://earlytibet.com/2012/05/03/blood-writing/

Vastmind

"....So when we pontificate about the "authentic" Buddhism or what Buddha really taught, don't neglect to consider that history has shown there is no Buddhist practice, then or now, that will not seem crazy to future Buddhists. That includes our own practice that we consider oh-so-modern and enlightened."


This was a great reminder not to judge other religions! We Buddhists have
'crazy' shit like all the other ones do. lololol.

So was the finger-burning a practice taught by Buddha? Is that what made it
"authentic" at the time? Will I one day look back at the Sutra's
and they sound crazy?

Cinorjer

There is a huge body of sutras that do not quote the Buddha, but contain insights and dharma writings by later monks. The Lotus Sutra in particular contains some passages that if taken literally seems to bless these practices, and the popularity of this one sutra cannot be overstated.

Tosh

@Cinorjer, thank you, I really enjoyed reading your post. Very interesting.

Vastmind

@Cinorjer...Oh ok, I see. It was a very intersting article for me. I admit, Im learning more
everyday that the Buddhism I was taught growing up was probably
not of the 'popularity'. Thanks for the history lesson!
May I continue to have a beginners mind.

Cinorjer

@vastminds what school of Buddhism were you taught?

Vastmind

@Cinorjer
Can you believe I was never asked that question until I was 22!?
The people I was raised around were........*whispers*.......socialists. haha
I was on a 'commune' , if you will.
I am only now learning that it was a complete mish mash of what
everyone there knew. The views they brought in.
Our at home readings were 'Be Here Now', Sutra pages, TONS of science books, etc.
But there were always people around from Zen backgrounds, Pure Land,
Tibe...you get it.
When meeting together, the teacher for that month had to be mindfull
not to exclude anyone. The lessons would be generic, but always a moral
to the story, and always back to Buddha.

funny side note...My Catholic Nana used to always try and sneak me out.
I went to her house some weekends, and to Mass, but always
went back home.

DairyLama

'Be Here Now'.

That was the book that originally turned me on to Buddhism.

BonsaiDoug

There is a huge body of sutras that do not quote the Buddha, but contain insights and dharma writings by later monks. [...]

It appears (and please correct me if my observations are off) this is where the "line" is often drawn. Suttas (Pali Cannon) represent The Buddha's words, and Sutras are assigned, as you say, to the Dharma of Monks later on in the history of Buddhism, giving birth to the many traditions which followed Theravada.

Or is that a bit too simplistic?

vinlyn

There is a huge body of sutras that do not quote the Buddha, but contain insights and dharma writings by later monks. [...]

It appears (and please correct me if my observations are off) this is where the "line" is often drawn. Suttas (Pali Cannon) represent The Buddha's words, and Sutras are assigned, as you say, to the Dharma of Monks later on in the history of Buddhism, giving birth to the many traditions which followed Theravada.

Or is that a bit too simplistic?

Really? Wow. I learned that sutta and sutra were just different spellings of the same word like karma and kamma.

RebeccaS

^^ I thought that, too.

Also, ewwwww at the finger burning, that's gross.

DairyLama

Really? Wow. I learned that sutta and sutra were just different spellings of the same word like karma and kamma.

Yes, "sutta" is Pali and "sutra" is Sanskrit. Though there does seem to be a convention that "sutta" refers to the texts in the Pali Canon, while "sutra" refers to the Mahayana texts.

RebeccaS

The Mahayana texts also include things from other monks and stuff, right? Whereas th Pali Canon is just the Buddha?

Cinorjer

The Mahayana texts also include things from other monks and stuff, right? Whereas th Pali Canon is just the Buddha?

Well....the Mahayana texts are much more extensive I believe and many of them come from later dates. I don't know enough about the Pali Canon to tell you if it's all supposed to have originated in that first Buddhist Council or if there are acknowledged later dharma commentaries and expansions included.

federica

Burning off fingers is not Buddhist practice.
It may be practised by Buddhists - but that doesn't MAKE it Buddhist practice.

Cinorjer

Burning off fingers is not Buddhist practice.
It may be practised by Buddhists - but that doesn't MAKE it Buddhist practice.

I know what you mean, but shouldn't you say it's not a "proper" Buddhist practice? And that still puts it in the realm of your opinion against the opinion of the many Obaku and Chan monks who practiced it. Granted, I agree with you, and so did the Soto and Rinzai Zen monks at the time. But, do you see my point that what is considered "proper" Buddhist practice is whatever the Buddhists decide is proper at the time? These were not stupid people, and not wild-eyed fanatics. Just Buddhists missing a finger, I suppose.

Sure, I think it's ridiculous. But I think a lot of the cultural trappings that many Buddhist schools cling to are ridiculous. That's my own understanding, and that means I won't get any benefit out of trying to practice them.

grackle

Another ritual was to have a very large swastika brand placed on the chest. In a more modern ritual connected to Chinese buddhism those who take the Bodhisattva vows will often place very small pieces of burning incense on their forearm.

BonsaiDoug

Yes, "sutta" is Pali and "sutra" is Sanskrit. Though there does seem to be a convention that "sutta" refers to the texts in the Pali Canon, while "sutra" refers to the Mahayana texts.

A better way to say it than I did, but yes, this is my understanding.

Sile

@cinorjer, which are the writings that praise the burning off of fingers, do you know offhand (or of some examples)?

Cinorjer

@cinorjer, which are the writings that praise the burning off of fingers, do you know offhand (or of some examples)?

It's often quoted from the seventh volume of the Lotus Sutra (supposed to be from the Buddha himself) a direct reference, to whit "burning one's little finger as an offering to the Buddha and the Lotus Sutra is better than donating all the treasures of the universe" but the translations I've found on the internet put me to sleep after a couple of paragraphs so I can't tell you exactly where in the sutra. The other references are obscure sutras that might not even have been translated into english yet. There are thousands of such.

Cinorjer

Another ritual was to have a very large swastika brand placed on the chest. In a more modern ritual connected to Chinese buddhism those who take the Bodhisattva vows will often place very small pieces of burning incense on their forearm.

I wonder if that's where the dragon scars on the forearms scene from King Fu came from?

Sile

Here's one - from The Sutra of the Lotus Flower of the Wonderful Law
Chapter 23 - The Story of the Bodhisattva Medicine King (translated by Bunno Kato):

"If anyone with his mind set on and aiming at Perfect Enlightenment is able to burn the fingers of his hand or even a toe of his foot in homage to a buddha's stupa he will surpass him who pays homage with domains, cities, wives, children, and his three-thousand-great-thousandfold land with its mountains, forests, rivers, pools, and all its precious things."

http://www.rk-world.org/publications/lotussutra_B23.html

RebeccaS

So did people just take it too literally then? It sounds a bit more literary then literal to me...

grackle

@cinorjer
I don't know about the scene from Kung Fu. What I observed but declined to follow was very tiny segments of burning incense placed on the forearms of those taking the Bodhisattva vows. By the time a certain number of circumambulations had taken place the tiny pieces would be extinguished. Chinese friends claimed there was no pain until after the ceremony.

Sile

Kato's translation says "burn," whereas a Chinese website I found said "burn off." It would be interesting to compare more translations.

zenff

Burning off fingers is not Buddhist practice.
It may be practised by Buddhists - but that doesn't MAKE it Buddhist practice.

Another one like that is bowing in front of Buddha statues. Buddhists do it. And they think it’s disrespectful to turn your feet towards the statue, not to mention wearing shoes around them.
But I never read a word from the Buddha on the subject. I suspect he would have found the idea ridiculous.

It’s the same with the worship of relics. The whole idea goes against the spirit of the sutras. You can’t imagine the Buddha talking about the merits of clinging to a little bone of a long dead arahant or of building a large stupa around one of his own hairs. It’s just silly.

Another crazy practice pops up in my mind.
I remember making an upper robe for a monk. It had to be made of “rags”. So a fine piece of cloth was cut into little pieces and sewed back together! There was a specific and detailed pattern for that. When the monk accepted the robe he made an inkblot on it, so it was in a “bad state”.
Completely idiotic.
It would be more in the spirit of wearing “rags” or “patch-robes” if the monks simply got their clothes from a second hand shop.

federica

(You say that, but a shed~load of 'second-hand shops have better-quality clothes than I have... rags are gone upmarket...!)

zenff

You're right.
In fact I usually get my clothes in second hand shops. And I don't look like a tramp.

DairyLama

The Mahayana texts also include things from other monks and stuff, right? Whereas th Pali Canon is just the Buddha?

I wish I knew! To me the suttas seem like a factual account of the Buddhas life and teachings, whereas the sutras are a more poetic description of the path and goal.

Cinorjer

The Mahayana texts also include things from other monks and stuff, right? Whereas th Pali Canon is just the Buddha?

I wish I knew! To me the suttas seem like a factual account of the Buddhas life and teachings, whereas the sutras are a more poetic description of the path and goal.

The Buddhist canon is vast and with a complicated history. Archeologists and scholars study and debate new discoveries every year, and analyze old fragments buried in dusty museums and temples. Literary analysis in particular has raised lots of questions about the various suttas that probably will never be answered. After all, it's generally agreed the real Buddha taught for over forty years. Can we really expect that in decades of teaching, the Buddha didn't refine his message and add to his original insight? After all, he wasn't constrained by an existing set of dogmas, but felt free to make them up or revise his message as he went along. Even in his own lifetime, his early disciples went on to teach and have their own disciples.

But that's studying Buddhism. Practicing Buddhism, that's a different thing entirely. Here, symbolism and ritualism and tradition are tools used to shape your actions and mind. We are presented with a gift, something great minds have polished and created for you over the centuries. We can appreciate the value of the gift and use it without worrying if it's the exact same shape and form as the one Buddha first gave to his own disciples.

Sile

Author James Benn makes the following observation in his book Burning for the Buddha: Self-Immolation in Chinese Buddhism:

----
Gifts of his own body, such as this one, number in the incalculable hundredsof thousands of myriads of millions of nayutas. O Beflowered by the King of Constellations! If there is one who, opening up his thought, wishes to attain anuttarasamyaksaœbodhi, if he can burn a fnger or even a toe as an offering to a Buddhastûpa, he shall exceed one who uses realm or walled city, wife orchildren, or even all the lands, mountains, forests, rivers, ponds, and sundryprecious objects in the whole thousand-millionfold world as offerings. (Miaofa lianhua jing, Hurvitz 1976, p. 298)

In this speech Šâkyamuni explicitly states that burning the body is not restricted to advanced bodhisattvas alone but may be practiced by anyone who wishes to attain buddhahood. However, in the typical fashion of the Lotus Sûtra, this claim for the powers of auto-cremation is immediately undercut by a further claim that the merit accrued by one who memorizes even a single gâthâ of the Lotus exceeds that gained by one who gives away a trichiliocosmfull of the seven jewels. No matter what praise it heaps on other practices, the Lotus Sûtra always reserves a special place in its heart for itself. [Benn, p. 61]
----

I would note that most or many sutras and other formal writings and teachings sound, I believe, as if they're overly praising themselves; this is a cultural and literary tradition of the time (and I've seen the same thing in other cultures). You can tell it's a convention, because the same teacher/writer will list one sutra as the "most important," and then when teaching another sutra, introduce that one as the "most important." I think it's good to think of it as we do the old English phrase, "Most honorable Sir...." It doesn't mean the speaker really thinks that particular sir is the most honorable; it's a respectful figure of speech. But Benn's point is well-taken: it's better to memorize even a small snippet of the Lotus Sutra than to burn yourself.

Patr

The Nikayas in Theravada or Agamas in Mahayana Buddhism are ascribed to the Buddha himself. There are a lot of Mahayana sutras which purportedly came from the Buddha but was hidden away etc, then found hundreds of years later!
It is very difficult to verify their authenticity; most likely were written by other Buddhist practitioners (arguably). Some of them even goes against the Nikayas' teachings.
Bowing, incense offering, fire pujas, full prostrations, high chair dais, blessings all actually goes against the grain.
In Buddhism, everything is within you, the good, bad, ugly (hehe). The Buddha left us a set of teachings, not instructions to pray or deify him. Just to spread the Dharma.
Humans will always try to leave their personal imprint in adding their own beliefs, ideas etc and pass it on as 'genuine discoveries, 2500 years of spam....

Further on, in Mahayana today, we have Mainstream Mahayana, mainly comprising Pure Land and Zen and we have Vajrayana which has absorbed many elements of Hinduism.

Beginners in Buddhist practice would do well to practice Pure Land, which subscribes to faith. As wisdom develops (over however many lifetimes), one should move on to Zen.

(Theravada is an excellent starting point).

In Chinese Zen practice, one needs a certain amount of Wisdom. Zen can be practiced alone, at home etc. This is different from the Japanese version, which Im not well versed in.

As the Buddha said, those without the faculty, use faith, those who develop wisdom, will discern and apply accordingly.

Those who are on the correct path, WILL KNOW.

The precepts already contain all the instructions on do and donts. Just apply common sense and adapt to our era. Following 100% to the letter is plain unintelligent.
The wise adapt...

Cinorjer

Hi @Patr. I like what you said. I see from your profile you're from Malaysia. Unlike a lot of Aisan countries, Malaysia doesn't seem to have one traditional Buddhist sect that dominates. Were you raised in Malaysia as a Buddhist?

Vastmind

@Patr ..... 'like'

Sile

The Nikayas in Theravada or Agamas in Mahayana Buddhism are ascribed to the Buddha himself. There are a lot of Mahayana sutras which purportedly came from the Buddha but was hidden away etc, then found hundreds of years later!
It is very difficult to verify their authenticity; most likely were written by other Buddhist practitioners (arguably). Some of them even goes against the Nikayas' teachings.
Bowing, incense offering, fire pujas, full prostrations, high chair dais, blessings all actually goes against the grain.
In Buddhism, everything is within you, the good, bad, ugly (hehe). The Buddha left us a set of teachings, not instructions to pray or deify him. Just to spread the Dharma.
Humans will always try to leave their personal imprint in adding their own beliefs, ideas etc and pass it on as 'genuine discoveries, 2500 years of spam....

Further on, in Mahayana today, we have Mainstream Mahayana, mainly comprising Pure Land and Zen and we have Vajrayana which has absorbed many elements of Hinduism.

Beginners in Buddhist practice would do well to practice Pure Land, which subscribes to faith. As wisdom develops (over however many lifetimes), one should move on to Zen.

(Theravada is an excellent starting point).

In Chinese Zen practice, one needs a certain amount of Wisdom. Zen can be practiced alone, at home etc. This is different from the Japanese version, which Im not well versed in.

As the Buddha said, those without the faculty, use faith, those who develop wisdom, will discern and apply accordingly.

Those who are on the correct path, WILL KNOW.

The precepts already contain all the instructions on do and donts. Just apply common sense and adapt to our era. Following 100% to the letter is plain unintelligent.
The wise adapt...

I think it's possible that if the Buddha mentioned burning oneself as a form of homage, then that may have been an acceptable cultural practice (as the OP suggested - things change - what's considered normal in one era is considered crackerdog in another).

So our personal imprint would be, today, to not burn ourselves because for us, it's not an accepted form of homage. In the Buddha's time, I'm guessing (what we would call) underage marriage was also acceptable. Doesn't mean we are being disrespectful today if we don't agree with underage marriage.

Patr

Hi to all,
Yes, all three branches of Buddhist practice are represented in Malaysia.
Theravada is divided into Sri Lanka and Thai lineages. While Mahayana is predominantly Pure Land, actually its very very rare to encounter Zen. While all the Vajrayana sects are here.

The Buddha was against any form of ritual (burning oneself... definitely not, haha).

Traditional Buddhism in Malaysia is infused with Taoism, much like Vajrayana and Hinduism/ Bon, Thai with local deties, etc.

Buddhism has a way of absorbing traditional elements, so much so that pure practices are not well defined.

If you subscribe to reincarnation, everyone is born with/without certain spiritual attainments and this will come to the fore in the present life. Example, a piano prodigy at 4 years old will most definitely be riding on their last life's imprints.

But I do not agree with the Vajrayana practice of recognising Tulkus. They should be allowed to make their own way. The Buddha forbade any use of supernatural attainments in this manner.

Lastly, Zen should only be practiced by those who understand. All this talk about emptiness is lost on the majority. This is Abhidamma territory. No good dwelling into advanced physics on the population, puts everyone off the main areas of importance.

KarunaDharmakaya

There is a huge body of sutras that do not quote the Buddha, but contain insights and dharma writings by later monks. The Lotus Sutra in particular contains some passages that if taken literally seems to bless these practices, and the popularity of this one sutra cannot be overstated.

The lotus sutra mentions those practices,then makes a point to show the reader that taking faith in the Lotus sutra brings infinite more merit than those practices.

Also those practices are not mandatory,and the burning practices are based on samadhi which is absorbtion,samadhi isnt enlightenment,and there are MANY samadhis(methods)

So to conclude the burning of finger isnt even needed to reach enlightenment,so you dont have to do it,second yhe lotus sutra states faith in the sutra is what is greater,one can burn his fingers off all day long,and still faith in the sutra is greater(chapt 23 LS)

Peace an

KarunaDharmakaya

Kato's translation says "burn," whereas a Chinese website I found said "burn off." It would be interesting to compare more translations.

No we burn with a hot rock on the forearm

Monks put 3 burns on the top of head.

Burning is common burning OFF is very taboo.

Although it has been done no doubt its frowned upon.

Again look at the qoute posted and read the next paragraph in chap 23 of the lotus sutra it explains how,faith in the sutra is greater yhan such practices.

Simply just have faith,u dont need burning

KarunaDharmakaya

Hey zenff
Relec worship is found in the paranibbana sutta in the digha nikaya.

zenff

Hey zenff
Relec worship is found in the paranibbana sutta in the digha nikaya.

Thanks for the correction. I’m still learning!

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html

28-31. "And why, Ananda, is a Tathagata, an Arahant, a Fully Enlightened One worthy of a stupa? Because, Ananda, at the thought: 'This is the stupa of that Blessed One, Arahant, Fully Enlightened One!' the hearts of many people will be calmed and made happy; and so calmed and with their minds established in faith therein, at the breaking up of the body, after death, they will be reborn in a realm of heavenly happiness. And so also at the thought: 'This is the stupa of that Paccekabuddha!' or 'This is the stupa of a disciple of that Tathagata, Arahant, Fully Enlightened One!' or 'This is the stupa of that righteous monarch who ruled according to Dhamma!' — the hearts of many people are calmed and made happy; and so calmed and with their minds established in faith therein, at the breaking up of the body, after death, they will be reborn in a realm of heavenly happiness. And it is because of this, Ananda, that these four persons are worthy of a stupa."

KarunaDharmakaya

Zenff

We all still learn every day.

Most Buddhist practices known today can be found in the suttas/sutras,the problem is their not all listed in one sutra,you might have to read 200 suttas just to find out why these Buddhist practices these 5 certain ways.

Hahaha 6000 pages just to look for one sentence that explains why Buddhists pray to Buddha:)

Did you know he walked on water in the pali canon?

As a matter of fact the best advice i can give you,is if a person says ANYTHING about the Lord Buddha ask them for a sutta/sutra that proves what they are saying.otherwise you might come out thinking Buddhism is atheistic and has no afterlife;)

Cloud

Or try not to think of the sutras too literally or you'll believe the Buddha walked on water.

KarunaDharmakaya

Or try not to think of the sutras too literally or you'll believe the Buddha walked on water.

Yea cause those things were not meant to be taken literal,they were a methophor for walking on the water of the mind.

Just like when the suttas say after your body dies you will be reborn among the 5 transmigations,it doesnt mean the actual death of the body,ifs a metaphor for....well make that up later.

Anything else we should make up?or take out?or pretend it doesnt exist?;)

Sile

Interesting--from Inside the Lotus Sutra: The Sutra of Innumerable Meanings, by Stephen Klick, p. 58:

"The Bodhisattva "Gladly Seen By All Living Beings" offered incense, but then realized that it was necessary to totally dedicate himself to this sutra. He "caught fire" which means that he worked tirelessly to benefit the beings around him.

It is unfortunate that occasional misguided students have taken this lesson literally and actually set themselves on fire, either as an "offering" or as way of protesting social injustice.

The chapter tells us that those who wish to attain enlightenment "would do well to burn a finger or one toe of their foot as an offering..." but this means that you should not be stingy when spreading the dharma. It means that you give of yourself."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3121702/Inside-The-Lotus-Sutra

Cloud

@KarunaDharmakaya, What I'm getting at is we should not mistake the scriptures (sutras or suttas) for truth itself. They are meant to be a guide, and we're meant to find out the truth for ourselves rather than simply relying on the words. The teachings are just a finger pointing to the moon, as they say, and even the Buddha knew that the teachings would be changed and misrepresented... and so ultimately we must investigate them for ourselves to know the difference between truth and fantasy. They are very different from divinely revealed truths of other religions, which are simply supposed to be upheld as true no matter if reality contradicts them or not.

KarunaDharmakaya

@KarunaDharmakaya, What I'm getting at is not to mistake the scriptures/sutras for truth itself. They are meant to be a guide, and we're meant to find out the truth for ourselves rather than simply relying on the words. The teachings are just a finger pointing to the moon, as they say, and even

the Buddha knew that the teachings would be changed and misrepresented... and so ultimately we must investigate them for ourselves to know the difference between truth and fantasy.

Okay so what your saying is that you consider those things to be lies.

Yes and i suppose by your view we can literally change and rewrite anything we disagree with,obviously we need to get rid of the 30 suttas that state materialim nhilist views are wrong view.hey by the way most western Buddhists for some odd reason think their is no afterlife heck saying there is no after life is considered wrong view in yeaaa most the suttas,yep lets cut those out,oh yea supernatural events yep cutting most the suttas,ohhh oh oh what about gods?yea the Buddha said those were the 5th transmigation,dang
Mmost suttas state the Buddha is the teacher of gods,okay..okay we cant get rid of all our suttas so lets just rewrite them to say tje Buddha is the teacher of nhilist atheists,instead of yhe teacher of gods.

Yep we have just turned the 3 baskets into a phamplet of the nhilist manifesto.

So what are we going to do with whats left of the 5 nikayas?
Oh most of that "stuff" is lies just burn it.

Oj yea and nirvana yea thats just momentary happiness.its gone when ur dead.

Buddhism is in a sad state.

Cloud

I never said anything of the sort. Talk about a misread. Buddhism is about suffering and the cessation of suffering, about "using" the teachings. The Buddha himself told us not to accept anything without applying our own common sense and judgment.

“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”

Hence the teachings are a guide. We apply them, we investigate them, we use them to alleviate suffering... but "believing" in everything as being literal is not the meaning of the Buddha's teaching. A lot of the teachings are indeed metaphorical in nature, because there was no easy way to explain things in literal terms. All of the teachings have meaning, and so throwing them out isn't in the cards... it's just how we view those teachings, whether wisely or foolishly, that matters.

KarunaDharmakaya

Interesting--from Inside the Lotus Sutra: The Sutra of Innumerable Meanings, by Stephen Klick, p. 58:

"The Bodhisattva "Gladly Seen By All Living Beings" offered incense, but then realized that it was necessary to totally dedicate himself to this sutra. He "caught fire" which means that he worked tirelessly to benefit the beings around him.

It is unfortunate that occasional misguided students have taken this lesson literally and actually set themselves on fire, either as an "offering" or as way of protesting social injustice.

The chapter tells us that those who wish to attain enlightenment "would do well to burn a finger or one toe of their foot as an offering..." but this means that you should not be stingy when spreading the dharma. It means that you give of yourself."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3121702/Inside-The-Lotus-Sutra

He sacrificed the body he loved(this was his pureland body)
What he did was give up his blissfull life in the pureland so be could come down and teach those who were suffering(he chose the Bodhisattva path)

Now in the pureland you CANNOT be killed by anouther(no violence)
Also in the pureland you do not die of old age,the very fact you leave pureland is a great "personal sacrifice"
So you cannoy be killed and do not die naturally.

Now reread this chapter and look closely(he manifests all phisical forms)
Keep reading with his mind he made his body fire,he didnt set himself on fire,he became fire and like a flame flickered(poof)this was his initiation into rebirth,for which he dropped to the human realms to preach.

Now notice he doesnt kill himself in human realm cause its wrong(bad example)he also doesnt just burn his arms off,he only does that cause he knows he can grow them back,and this great act is done to lead one to the final message: even burning ur arms off doesnt equal taking faith in the LS.

Then the purland of amitayus is mentioned later.

KarunaDharmakaya

Hey cloud

Doesnt he mention gods in that very sutta?

Also if its the one im thinking you are talking about that sutta was taught in reference to other religions due to other religious sects were about to come preach in a Buddhist community,so the Buddha told his followers to juxge them based upon reason.

Or i can simply do the same thing as you did.
You chose to not accept the many supernatural events in buddhist suttas claiming they are madeup/fake and lies(i mean use common sense about religion;)
Ill just copy and say that passage is made up anf not of the Buddha since supernatural suttas out are more of and outweigh the one and few like it posted.

Hahahaha
Bey look i can pick an chose to.

Cloud

It applies to everything, whether other religious teachings or his own. The Buddha always said his teachings were verifiable, and so we should verify them for ourselves. It's not simply because we're told they're the truth that we should accept them as such... we should use our own reason and judgment, our own efforts, to penetrate the truth. The teachings are very much meant to apply to our lives, in the here and now, which is the only place we can practice toward the alleviation of suffering.

upekka

if anyone interest read devadaha sutta in majjima nikaya

it says why Buddha does not appreciate painful practises


and

it says in His first sermon Buddha (Dhamma cakka) said harming oneself (attakilamatanuyoga) is not acceptable for one's deliverance