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.
Where did "Buddhism" come from?
zenguitar
Bad BuddhistNew England Veteran
Greetings, wise Sangha. I'm not sure if this qualifies as an "advanced idea," but where do the words "Buddhism" and "Buddhist" come from? Is there an analog for this term in Asian languages? Something tells me the Buddha did not refer to his teachings or his followers that way. I'm asking because whenever I see an "-ism" I think: ideology, conformity, dogma, intolerance, and penalties for dissent. And that's not what the Dharma is about at all. Any thoughts?
0
Comments
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Buddha#Etymology
From Dictionary.com.
I don't know for certian but it's quite possible that what you "see" and what you're looking at are two entirely different things
Yup, thanks. I guess I'm really asking who in 1801 decided to put an -ism on the end of Buddha.
@zenguitar Yeah like who put the -ianity and -ians on the end of Christ.
Suppose it's easier to say and spell than "BuddhaDharma" or "the Buddha's Dharma" or some such. The -ism is a shortcut, as is the -ist for describing a follower of those teachings (and that teacher).
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma_(Buddhism).
Guess that answers your question, @zenguitar! Not very specific though...
Buddhism is essentially a tradition of seeking an awakened state of consciousness. It is the entitlement of every human being if they choose to pursue it. However, it does not elevate you to a position above your station, and gives you nothing more than you already had. The transformation of consciousness that leads to a cessation of suffering is what it is all about. If you want more than that, then you have missed the point. Conceptuality, philosophy, ideology, theology... Just attempts at expressing the inexpressible...
The names we use for Native American tribes are oftentimes names that were given to them by other tribes and are not what they call themselves.
It's logical to assume that other namings have similar origins.
I suppose that the term "Buddhist" came from people to had to have a name for these followers of the teachings of this man they called "Buddha". Buddhism was most likely a word imposed by others to label the system of practice and study they saw in these people they called Buddhists.
The Buddha isn't recorded as using such terms, so it's unlikely that contemporary students used themselves and probably didn't pass such terminology.
Of course, at some point, somebody did come up with it. They had to call it something and they couldn't call it horseshit.
However, we are beings who must label ourselves and define those labels. Where community exists these labels, these words we use have a certain meaning and those names and their meaning are often shared by other communities. Where no community exists, these words become increasingly meaningless.
It's just another way to keep communication open. There is a difference in holding labels to a point that we are attached to them, or averse to them, and using them for their purpose: communicating in the world we live in. They only have as much power as you assign them in your mind. But is it worth the trouble to drop the -ism and -ist so that when someone wants to discuss beliefs with you,and you start talking and they say "Oh, you are a Buddhist/you follow Buddhism" and you say "well, no, I don't believe in using those words, I just follow what Buddha taught." That's just more confusion (and more senseless talking) than anyone needs.
Thanks @karasti, good point. However, as you point out, the label is also a convenient way to close communication, as in "I am a Buddhist/Christian/[insert your religion], and we alone possess the sole and complete truth!" Which is of course bad. Maybe in the current world situation it's better to veer away from labels rather than identify with them too strongly. To hell with convenience, at least it will get people thinking when they ask "Are you a Buddhist?" and you respond, "Well, yes and no."
Most of us but not all, require labels. By being here, we align with an interest in ideas centered around an awakening in the Dharmic revelation, different from say the Abrahamic religions.
An interesting tidbit, in China "Buddhism" is "Fojiao" pronounced something like "Foe-gee-all" and the practice is referred to as Following the Dharma in one translation or another. It's true that the term Buddhism was invented by British scholars and missionaries in the 1800s, because to them, a religion was defined by what god you worshiped. They thought followers of the Dharma worshiped Buddha, thus Buddhism.
Well, give up on communication. Virtually every word in every language is a label of some sort.
Seems rather self-centered to suggest .....
Mountains are once again mountains or that's the end of conscious information sharing.
Unless we develop telepathy.
@zenguitar My teacher was interested in language in her university studies. She pointed out that words despite their definitions have different connotations to various people. For you 'ism' alerts warning bells, but not all people feel that way.
Yes, the term "Buddhism" is a Western invention.
Ideally, we talk about Buddhadharma or Buddhadhamma.
Sorry to bump in with my rare-book stuff, but I dag up a beautiful definition by Christmas Humphreys the other day, of Dhamma being "a living message of self-enlightenment."
From what I've heard and read (both Dharma teachers and wise ones of no specific belief system) words and language ITSELF will show itself to be a hindrance all on its own in everyone's practice. I see that the previous posts in this thread have done a darn good job explaining just why this is!
"Buddhism (a word invented by British scholars and Christian missionaries at the beginning of the nineteenth century) is referred to in the East as Buddha-dharma or Dharma vinaya."
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma(Buddhism).
_
Jolly good to see it was a British invention. Top hole!
@chaz, actually I thought it might be a good idea to get rid of labels that are excessively divisive or flagrantly artificial, not eliminate words altogether.
Thanks everyone for your comments. I had no idea that the term "Buddhism" was invented by Christian missionaries, that's interesting.
Well, naturally. Had it been American, we would be pronouncing and spelling it 'Booudhism'....
"Buddhanity"?
Buddhalicious!
Budd-have-a-nice-day-maam
Talking about Brits, and colonialism and missionaries, I have this 1880 edition of Spence Hardy's "Manual of Buddhism," which Christmas Humphreys claims is the first book to bring Buddhism to the West (I think the first edition dates back to the 1850s)
After a thorough over 500-page analysis of Buddhism, he ends his book with the sentence that Buddhism "will soon be swept from its base by the power that alone is resistless, and in its stead will be erected the temple of the Lord, in which all the earth will worship the Father Everlasting."
It goes without saying that Mr Spence Hardy was a missionary who did not have a great affection for the subject of his book.
I wish I still had the book, but in one coffee table book on Thailand, Gore Vidal skewered some same-era Brit historian (?) who had written terribly prejudice things about the Thai people.
Finding such old chestnuts can be quite fun.
Bury my heart at Wounded Knee.
If you insist.
What about the rest of you....?
The book? I read that in high school and for a long time, couldn't bear to watch any westerns.