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.
Contemporary Buddhism vs. the foundations of Buddhism...
Hi everyone, I am new to this site so bear with me here.
I am currently taking a Humanities course in school on Living Religions and have an assignment due which discusses the contemporary Buddhist practices and how they reflect the foundations of the religion. I've read some very interesting sites on Siddhartha Guatama's childhood and how Buddhism came to be. I also understand the basic concepts of: 1) "Four Noble Truths"; 2) "Eightfold Noble Paths"; 3) the threefold characters of the world; and, 4) "The Middle Way". In my reading there was also talk that in the original practice of Buddhism, it was believed that the soul died with the body, but I am not sure that belief is still true today.
My question is this: I don't know much about the modern practices of Buddhism today. Can anybody enlighten me? As my final project, I will be writing a paper on Buddhism, and will have to visit a Buddhist place of worship; is there such a location? I will also have to interview somebody about the faith, so I need to gain as much knowledge as I can.
I would really appreciate any and all feedback from anybody who is willing to share their understanding, of what appears to be a healthy and happy lifestyle.
Thank you so much for your time and consideration. :wavey:
Mouse
I am currently taking a Humanities course in school on Living Religions and have an assignment due which discusses the contemporary Buddhist practices and how they reflect the foundations of the religion. I've read some very interesting sites on Siddhartha Guatama's childhood and how Buddhism came to be. I also understand the basic concepts of: 1) "Four Noble Truths"; 2) "Eightfold Noble Paths"; 3) the threefold characters of the world; and, 4) "The Middle Way". In my reading there was also talk that in the original practice of Buddhism, it was believed that the soul died with the body, but I am not sure that belief is still true today.
My question is this: I don't know much about the modern practices of Buddhism today. Can anybody enlighten me? As my final project, I will be writing a paper on Buddhism, and will have to visit a Buddhist place of worship; is there such a location? I will also have to interview somebody about the faith, so I need to gain as much knowledge as I can.
I would really appreciate any and all feedback from anybody who is willing to share their understanding, of what appears to be a healthy and happy lifestyle.
Thank you so much for your time and consideration. :wavey:
Mouse
0
Comments
I think this question is much more difficult than finding out who Buddha was, the Four Noble Truths, The Eightfold Path, etc.
You might want to dig through some of the threads already in this forum. There were a couple discussing "Western Buddhism" and some of the other factions of Zen, Chinese, Indian and Tibetan Buddhism.
Western Buddhism seems to be becoming it's own sort of animal in which people don't necessarily follow the traditions and such of longer existing forms of Buddhism.
I find with myself that I don't necessarily worry myself with finding "Enlightenment". My Buddhism - whatever that may be - mostly consists of "mindfulness" in my day to day life - and "compassion" and "mindful" meditation.
As for prayer wheels, prayer beads, Avatars, Boddhisavtvas, the more mystical elements of what Buddha is supposed to have achieved - I haven't gotten there yet.
Dig through the site. See what you can find out. Buddhism 101 and Buddhism In The Modern World both have some great posts regarding this. Plus, some people have provided some great links.
-bf
BUT
I find the question itself very interesting and worthy of being deconstructed.
The first aspect of the question is that it describes Buddhism as a religion. This may not be the case. Elsewhere, I have compared Buddhism with the fleece of a sheep, acquiring burrs which stick to it but are not part of the underlying stuff. IMHO, the quasi-religious aspects of Buddhism are just such accretions.
In one sense, it would be possible to see instructive similarities between the development of Buddhism and that of Christianity. In both cases, we can only date their existence from a period after the death/disappearnce of the founding teacher. In both cases, no particular liturgies are prescribed. In both cases, differences of opinion and practice arose among the survivors and their successors, resulting in divergent views. In both cases, 'missionary' activity brought new, syncretic elements to be embroidered onto the original.
Christianity differs from Buddhism in that there was, speedily, an imposing of monolithic imperialism which resulted in the creation of a normative 'gospel'. Buddhism, instead of being pruned into a political instrument, carried on cross-fertilising and throwing off new forms.
When you come to look at contemporary practice of Buddhism, you have a vast canvas, as you can see here and on, say, E-Sangha:
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/
First of all, there are Buddhist temples, though many Buddhists don't attend. It is not a requirement and these generally aren't "places of worship". Buddhist practices vary widely, but there is no single Buddhist deity or even an agreed upon set of deities. Many Buddhists like myself are atheist. In addition, some might take offense to the term "faith". While many Buddhists do believe in mystical/supernatural ideas, the emphasis of Buddhism is on practice and the teachings of a mortal man. Buddha himself advised us to see for ourself if the things he proposed worked for us - not simply believe something because someone else says that's the way it is.
As for my practice, like many western Buddhists I take time to read things that I think expand my view of life and the world. Those writings may or may not be "Buddhist", but that doesn't matter as much as their effect. I meditate on what I read and just generally what occurs to me to think about. I do very little formal meditation, but I do find that a little here and there helps relieve stress. I don't go to a temple, but I'm interested in someday going to a meditation center. My only contact with other Buddhists is online (primarily in this forum).
Anyways, if you have any more specific questions (anything at all) feel free to ask and I'll do my best to answer from my experience. I can't say I'm a "typical" Buddhist, but such a person really doesn't exist. One thing you'll discover about Buddhism is that is far more varied than the Abrahamic religions.
Again, there are various thoughts about this. As far as I know, Buddhism doesn't traditionally even have a concept of "soul" - especially not in the Christian sense. Obviously though, there are Buddhists who do believe in souls, spirits, etc. Personally, I don't. I believe that "who we are" (as best as can be defined) is our body and that our consciousness is the creation of our brain. When we die and our brain shuts off, well, that's it.
One aspect of contemporary Buddhism that you might like to consider, which is genuinely new, is the notion of "Engaged Buddhism".
My first encounter with the notion that the Dharma calls us to social and ecological action was to hear Joanna Macy on TV. You can learn more about her and here work here:
http://www.joannamacy.net/html/engaged.html
Engaged Buddhism is not a function of a single 'school'. The Venerable Thich Nhat Hanh, a Vietnamese monk now living in France, represents another strand of this Western weaving.
It should not be surprising that Buddhism should be altered by its encounter with the Christian West. Initial interest in Europe was among those who, towards the end of the 19th century, were deeply disillusioned by an established church which could well be described as the Conservative Party at prayer. Within the churches, there existed a strong, if marginal, movement that demanded social action as integral to the gospel message. In the UK, this was especially so among the 'High' or ritualist Anglicans who were also of a mystical persuasion.
Buddhism arrived as a sort of magic show, with tall tales of magic and levitation. This aspect of myth-building can still be seen in the 20th century with that rogue "Lobsang Rampa" and his Third Eye nonsense. The importance of this book in the spread of Buddhism should not be underestimated however: it was enormously popular and many a young reader (myself among them) went to find out more. What we met was an austere form of Theravadan Buddhism, with strong emphasis on textual study. Christmas Humphreys published his Pelican Book, Buddhism, in 1951, a popular paperback in an age of heavy, scholarly tomes. I can still remember my excitement as I read it for the first time!
Through all this time, D. T. Suzuki was bringing Zen to the West through his translations, books and teachings. He is truly the father of Western Zen and still a great read. As against the very scholarly approach of some, Suzuki brought us the notion of zazen, sitting meditation, jokes and koans.
As interest in Buddhism spread, so we were also to witness the breaking of Tibet. From the holocaust of the Chinese invasions, we began to hear new Buddhist voices.
One of the criticisms levelled at Buddhism is that it has no 'social' dimension, its practitioners being 'detached'. Although the proper term would be "non-attached", there is some truth in the accusation that much Buddhist teaching focuses on 'enlightenment' and is prepared to ignore social injustice and need as being simply unavoidable dukkha (the inevitable suffering entailed in incarnation). New Buddhists, like Joanna Macy, were not prepared to leave it at that. The work of engaged Buddhists came to general attention, I suppose, with the Shanti Movement in San Francisco in the early days of AIDS when all our patients died.
I have to admit that, when I first heard the expression "engaged Buddhism", I laughed. How could the Dharma be 'engaged'? But I quickly came to realise that the Noble Eighfold Path is not complete unless we recognise our interdependence both with each other and with the world at large. And reading the work of the Dalai Lamas has shown me how far HH the 14th Dalai Lama has moved Buddhism from the feudalism of his predecessors.
This is rather long and I must take full responsibility for all the errors that it must contain. I hope, nevertheless, that you will some find some grist to your term paper mill.
I went out to the website you listed for Joana Macy and read through some of her statements.
I guess with this thread being based around "contemporary" Buddhism - it's a good place to put this type of a link.
On the other hand, to me, it seems like it's Buddhism being changed into some sort of Mother Earth worship/practice.
Not that that is a bad thing - and I think being aware of Nature is a good thing. To me, though, I haven't made a real correlation between worshipping Nature in my practice of being a Buddhist.
Is that how you see this information?
Just curious.
-bf
I put the Macy link because it represents and aspect of contemporary Buddhism and Tschuver was asking about exactly that.
Within both Buddhism and Christianity (these being my experience), there exists a strong and growing 'earth awareness' which needs to be recognised. Many people have been influenced by the Gaia Hypothesis and looked for ways in which to integrate it into their belief structure.
Nevertheless, Deep Ecology is only one aspect of Engaged Buddhism, just as it is of "engaged" Christianity. You may want to do your own searching on the work of social solidarity which has arisen as a result of Buddhists taking action in the world rather than withdrawing from it.
This is one of the renewed aspects of Dharma practice and teaching which appears to me to have resulted from the Buddhism/West interface.
I think it's a great post and is a great example of contemporary Buddhism. Do you have any other information on other forms of contemporary Buddhism? I'm wondering how many other forms of "western" or contemporary practices of Buddhism there are or that are springing up.
-bf
A mor approachable form of Engaged Buddhism is that taught by Thich Nhat Hanh, with his notion of social interbeing. You may want to look at his writings and broadcasts.
-bf