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.
the true religion
Hey...
So, I was just wondering is Buddhism considers itself the only 'true' religion, or does it consider all religions the same?
Thanks!
-Brad
So, I was just wondering is Buddhism considers itself the only 'true' religion, or does it consider all religions the same?
Thanks!
-Brad
0
Comments
That's one of the beautiful things about an individual path like this
Providing they do as I say.
:rolleyes:
Yes, that WAS a joke.....
Yeah, I agree. People who say their religion is the only one and true religion are extraordinarily deluded and fearful. They have no confidence in themselves or their religion.
Like Brian, I don't really consider Buddhism to be a religion either, though it fills the place of a religion in our lives you could say. That's why discussions of god really are irrelevant in Buddhism.
Palzang
It's like voting for a certain party. If you didn't think they were the best party, you wouldn't vote for them. Same is true of religion. If you didn't think it had the most truth, you wouldn't be a part of it.
Palzang
Not at all. Most devout Christians believe that you can only be saved through Jesus alone. And yet, they don't generally do violence onto people as a result of this. Most live peacefully and let others do the same.
Buddhism is a word that's used to describe a predominately Eastern philosophy, religion and ethical way of life, but it can also be used as a word to describe a rigorous mental discipline designed for a very specific purpose, the end of suffering. That's why I tend to view Buddhism as a pragmatic approach to suffering rather than as an abstract philosophy, religion, etc.
I don't know if Buddhism is the "only one true religion," but I do know that it doesn't necessarily view all religions the same. As Dhammanando Bhikkhu puts it (albeit in a different context), "The Buddha wasn't "a one-sided speaker" (ekamsavadin), but rather "one who speaks after analysing the matter" (vibhajjavadin)."
The Buddha does say, for example, that, "In any doctrine & discipline where the noble eightfold path is not found, no contemplative of the first... second... third... fourth order [stream-winner, once-returner, non-returner, or arahant] is found. But in any doctrine & discipline where the noble eightfold path is found, contemplatives of the first... second... third... fourth order are found. The noble eightfold path is found in this doctrine & discipline, and right here there are contemplatives of the first... second... third... fourth order" (DN 16).
Nevertheless, the Buddha did encourage others to respect ascetics and wanders from other sects regardless of their differences. In fact, this attitude is one of the things that so impressed and pleased Upali — a disciple of the Jaina founder Niganta Nataputta (Mahavira), one of the Buddha's main contemporary rivals, who tried to defeat the Buddha in debate but was himself defeated — after he was won over by the Buddha:
"Venerable sir, I am even more satisfied and pleased with the Blessed One for telling me that. Venerable sir, I have heard that the recluse Gotama says thus: 'Gifts should be given only to me; gifts should not be given to others. Gifts should be given only to my disciples' gifts should not be given to others' disciples. Only what us given to me is very fruitful, not what is given to others. Only what is given to my disciples is very fruitful, not what is given to others' disciples.' But, on the contrary, the Blessed One encourages me to give gifts to the Niganthas."
(MN 56, Bodhi)
Jason
When I was a Christian it was the true path for me at that time. Now that I follow the Buddha's teachings and can benefit from them, this is the true way for me at this time.
It all depends on what a person can relate to and learn and benefit from at any given time in their life. Whatever gives them what they need to work on themselves to become better human beings is the true path for them at that time.
But nothing stays the same forever. Everything is in a constant state of becoming. To consider any path to be the only true path for all humans at all times shows a complete and profound lack of understanding of what a human being is and what the nature of reality is.
Another good question, Brad. Keep learning, analyzing, and contemplating. It's wonderful that you're thinking about things like this at your age. You can be proud of yourself for it.
And attempting to do so while diving is a sure fire way to get a mouth full of salt water.
The Buddha did not consider his teachings as the only valid or required religion. However, the Buddha also did not consider all religions as the same.
The Buddha said there was only one way for the purification of beings. However, the Buddha did not regard all beings were interested in purification. Thus, he did not regard his unique (supramundane) teachings as suitable or necesassary for all people.
Traditionally in Buddhism there are two levels of teachings. The first level is the mundane, called lokiya dhamma. The second level is the supramundane, called lokuttara dhamma. Lokiya means 'of the world' whereas lokuttara means 'beyond or above the world'.
The mundane is based in morality or merit and teachings about rebirth & reincarnation fall into this category. The supramundane is based in liberation from suffering and the teachings such as the Four Noble Truths, impermanence, emptiness and not-self fall into this category.
In the Buddha's time, supramundane teachings were generally (but not exclusively) only taught to monks and nuns and the mundane was generally taught to laypeople or faith-followers.
However today, especially with Westerners, because we are educated and read books by scholars, we tend to read and hear both the mundane and supramundane teachings.
What I am saying is the Buddha held different kinds of religions are necessary in the world. However, not all religions can lead human beings to complete liberation from suffering. That is because when a mind is not free from 'self-view', it is not completely free and pure.
The Buddha said:
With metta
DDhatu
I was a Christian for many years. Reading these two sentences, I thought: You know what? Religions are wonderful---they help people on the RIGHT PATH. You are taught to love your neighbor but you are not taught HOW to love. Jesus told us to refrain from anger but the Christians don't tell you HOW to refrain. I think one can practice the way of the Buddha all by itself or incorporate it into your own religious belief systems.
Absolutely correct Suzanne... The principles that underly Buddhism (Compassion and Love) should be found in all the world's major religions, so incorporating Buddhism into your life and religion should not be an issue.
Simply put, if say I'm born a christian and stay a devout christian do I still go to hell if the Muslim religion was correct, or how about the Aztec or ancient egyptian, roman or greek religions, etc etc - I mean whose's to say one of the early religeons people in caves practiced wasn't correct and EVERYONE will go to their vision of hell because of that?
A very interesting book I read, "God Wants you Dead", which I recommend to everyone, beautifully illustrated the spread of political, religeos, etc ideas- they usually have the usefull/good part, i.e "I shall not kill, yada yada", some trash "wear white on sundays" (I'm not talking about any belief in particular just picking these on random) , and the self-preservation portion "spread the gospel, kill the infidels, etc", and some parts that are just plain retarded/dangerous . One should learn to disect each belief and ideology to see which parts do what, and consume just the goods tuff, and discard the bad. That I belive is basic logic, ubiqutous in both science and budhism.
J
Can you please elaborate on this point?
How so and why, do you think?
With thanks
Abu
Palzang
If someone tells you your house is on fire and you continue to sit and watch television, it's pretty clear you don't believe them. If you put even half as much effort into pursuing enlightenment as into your daily activities, I'd agree that you are pursuing enlightenment seriously.
Tai Situ Rinpoche taught a mahamudra seminar in the United States and set up a program of meditation practice that took two hours, seven days a week. He said that if you do the practice, you'll definitely see results. How many did the full practice? I doubt if it were more than one in ten.
_/\_
This kinda thing has caused more wars in my mind to be worthy of considering. I am just trying to find out if it is the true religion for me and if at some point able, assist someone else who wants to share the path.
I really like your reply here, Dude. One-way-only dogmatism is rather like arguing over "spiritual real estate," as if to say, "This world was made for my folks and not for you heathen."
The attitude that you've verbalized is one that asserts that the world was made for all. Therefore, to be a spiritual aspirant, each one must find his or her own appropriate path and share the road selflessly with others who happen to be on it. To do so, we must lend a helping hand to fellow travellers along the way that are deterred by setbacks, hardships, outdated roadmaps, or what-have-you.
If I were pressed further, though, I'd admit that if there were a true religion it would be the religion of the Heart, as that is where the highest Truth of love is enthroned. Ideologies cannot possess love, but a heart can —be it eager, restive, patient, broken, or on fire.
For whom was this world made, if not for you, Dude?
Isn't this just it? We all lack urgency! The house is on fire and we are sitting around commenting on how pretty the flames are. People spend 23 hours practicing samsara and think it is sufficient to practice nirvana for an hour if they are lucky and House isn't on.
I can see that in my life, if I want something I generally get it. I will move heaven and earth to make sure that I do. If this is true of material things it is true of spiritual things as well. So few people really prioritize realization. What a tragedy.
This is the rule, not the exception. We are probably the most distracted humans in the history of the world thanks to all of our appliances. Funny how we create all of these machines for convenience and now have no free time left.
Deluded people certainly might sit in a burning house, not knowing that they are in danger. The fire that is burning is sickness, old age and death. If you think that these won't visit you, well...
Let's not forget that many of the people sitting in the burning house are heavily beset with challenges that keep them imprisoned there. People are limited and have a heavy load of responsibilities that keep them turning on the spit. If no boddhisattva comes their way and points out the exit-way, their delusions at least might give some comfort.
There are many lifetimes to achieve liberation. For one reason or another, many cannot succeed in this generation. Liberation springs from one liberty to one much greater, and many are now in bonds from which they cannot or will not free themselves.
The fire, at least, will bring them some respite from their sojourneys.
How do you know all this? Is this from or through your observation/experience, or is this as read?
Also, without what you call "Bodhisattvas" is it not possible for the Dharma to continue to flourish (and not going into the facts of the everpresent Law of Dharma)
With thanks for any elucidation
Abu
I don't know how to answer you except to say, I have observed. People are heavily besieged by the day-to-day demands of life and by responding to the needs of family and friends. We all need role models and people to inspire us; who better than a bodhisattva? Essentially, illumination cannot be bought by our efforts alone; its "corpus," as it were, must first be seen in a teacher who knows the way out. There is something that we "catch" from our guru. I think the saying goes: Truth is caught, not taught. Something like that, anyhow.
I had, for over 25 years, my own "bodhisattva," from whom I learned so much, both in instruction and by absorption. He died recently and at his memorial I discovered that there were literally hundreds of people that he adopted as his own "special children." We all believed we had a unique relationship to him because of the way he knew, directed, and supported us. But the truth was, my swami just had an immense capacity for love and was able joyously to take a whole lot of people under his wings. I consider him a bodhisattva and feel his care and protection even now that he is no longer physically on the earth.
Swamiji took a lot onto himself for me and reassured me that nothing in life is wasted. It's really all good. However, if things don't pan out exactly as I'd like it is better for me not to escape the burning house if it means I'll have to refrain from the effort of helping others out, too. My actions in this life should be ones of helping others. What's the hurry?
H.H. The Fourteenth Dalai Lama
"His Holiness the Dalai Lama has said on many occasions that he believes all major religions have the same potential to transform us into better human beings. Therefore, if a particular religion is accomplishing this objective by helping its practitioners to become better, kinder, more compassionate beings, then why should it matter which religion one practices? What is most important is that we are making this world we live in a better place for everyone."
Lama Chuck Stanford, Rime Buddhist Center and Monastery
Ahh beautiful . Thankyou Nirvy
I know what you mean about your swami -- well at least I think I relate because I feel the same way about my teacher.
And, I have had the great good fortune of meeting many of the Awakened - it does affect something.
Thankyou again for your response.
Namaste,
Abu.
Q: Did you personally suffer during the war?
A: I didn’t experience any bombing myself but my aunt, for example, was killed by bombing in her neighborhood. I pray that America will never have to go through the hardships of what it was like in Japan to lose a war. It’s probably never going to be the case that America would lose a war but I think it’s the most miserable experience. I have received my personal residence visa. Last fall I think I got it. So now that I have that visa I’m among the many who worry about America’s future. I well understand the world situation in which Christians and Jews and Muslims are always fighting endlessly with each other because they’re getting caught up with individual concerns. When you look for the causes of all the world conflicts you’ll find them in religion.
Q: Not including Zen Buddhism?
A: If anyone were to appear and say, Zen Buddhism is Number One! Zen Buddhism is the best!, they would be just as bad as everybody else.
Q: Zen is not a religion?
A: Of course, but it’s not religion. Religion means a teaching based on the belief in God. But Buddhism is Shukyo, which doesn’t include the belief in a world-creating God. When the Buddha died, he didn’t say believe in God. He said make the dharma activity your teacher.
Source: The New York Times
First Published: 9th December, 2007
_/\_
Hey, Abu, I am touched by your warm and friendly greetings. May you always carry your chosen ideal with you and be the light.
Thanks for the beautiful blog.
Namastate
__________
"My religion is simple. My religion is kindness."
—His Holiness, the Dalai Lama
Interesting question. Reminds me of a couple of quotes -
Ninety percent of all religious teachings are designed to manipulate minds and emotions to catch, hold and extract energy and devotion from its followers, while only 10 percent of such teachings are truly priceless and valuable to one's social, physical and spiritual welfare.
We encourage people to search out the highest and the best in every religion or science, to take the 10 percent that is priceless and throw the rest away as the garbage which it is, for it clutters our living space if we keep it around.
http://www.transactual.com/cac/ready.html
"Like the bee gathering honey from the different flowers, the wise person accepts the essence of the different scriptures and sees only the good in all religions."
~ Gandhi
http://grjallen.150m.com/quotes.htm
Namaste
Well, it depends on what you mean by only 'true' religion. I guess the strict answer would be no coz I don't think many Buddhists would consider Buddhism to be a religion.
Maybe a more appropriate question to ask is: Does Buddhism consider itself the only way to cease suffering?
To which I would have to say that the only path which results in the cessation of suffering is:
Right view
Right resolve
Right speech
Right action
Right livelihood
Right effort
Right mindfulness
Right concentration
You may call this the eightfold path to perfection. You may call this Buddhist. You may call it a Christian path. It doesn't matter what you call it - it is the only way to completely cease suffering.
Kind Regards,
Vangelis
You know what, Brad? I don't think I directly answered the question from my point of view as a Buddhist. As a Theravadin Buddhist, yes, Buddhism is the ONLY system that directly and completely addresses the problems of experiential existence and provides a complete and unique solution. If I did not believe that, I would not be a Buddhist. When I was a xtian, I was looking for the very same things (namely a path of practice to improve my spiritual development) that I finally found only in Buddhism.
Clearly the theistic religions could not supply the requirements I was looking for. Namely, a clearly defined, logical goal with an equally clearly defined path of practice to achieve that goal. The whole process needed to be verifiable as well. The theistic religions make unsubstantiable statements that are basically meaningless as they cannot be verified in this very lifetime.
That is not to say that there are not other systems on this planet that don't meet the criteria. Jainism for example, is similar to Buddhism but I have rejected these based on logical investigation. This of course is a personal conclusion and I accept this. Upon investigation, only Buddhism is consistent, coherent and complete in its specification and solution of the problems of existence.
This is a direct statement which I have avoided in previously for not wanting to offend anyone. However, upon reflection on the words of the Buddha himself as recorded in the Pali canon, I should not be "shy" to tell it as I see it. The Buddha himself was direct and firm with his comments especially when debating ascetics from other systems.
Kind Regards,
Vangelis
No, not "of course".
I tried four different smoking-cessation programs/techniques/aids, and none of them worked ... for ME. Each had its own success rate, so you couldn't say they weren't "true".
The fifth one worked ... for ME. Does that mean this technique was the only "true" technique? Of course not.
The teachings of Siddhattha Gotama are unique in this world as being the only ones that guide you to self-awakening to reality, as opposed to simply giving a comfortable message to soothe you during this short life. That's not to say religions are necessarily wrong, but that they do not take you down this road that leads to enlightenment.