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.
Regarding things Westerners like me have trouble accepting...
ShiftPlusOne
Veteran
Reincarnation, karma, ghosts and other concepts are all inherited from Hindu and Indian culture.
If Buddha was born elsewhere... lets say Sweden for example. Would he still be teaching using Hindu concepts? Would he realise upon enlightenment "hey, we're all wrong, the Indians are right, I need to teach karma and reincarnation as well"?
I think Buddha had a high level of understanding other humans, so he knew that he would have to put everything in terms others would understand. Obviously karma was something everyone believed in and understood, so it was a good starting point.
Perhaps instead of teaching about reincarnation, samsara and Nirvana he'd say the ultimate goal is to reach enlightenment and go to Valhala?
Am I wrong? I'd like to hear from those who accept reincarnation as absolute fact.
If Buddha was born elsewhere... lets say Sweden for example. Would he still be teaching using Hindu concepts? Would he realise upon enlightenment "hey, we're all wrong, the Indians are right, I need to teach karma and reincarnation as well"?
I think Buddha had a high level of understanding other humans, so he knew that he would have to put everything in terms others would understand. Obviously karma was something everyone believed in and understood, so it was a good starting point.
Perhaps instead of teaching about reincarnation, samsara and Nirvana he'd say the ultimate goal is to reach enlightenment and go to Valhala?
Am I wrong? I'd like to hear from those who accept reincarnation as absolute fact.
0
Comments
They were probably were some Vikings who might believe in reincarnation. Heck there were Buddhist missionaries who did meet with Vikings.
http://www.vikingrune.com/2009/08/oseberg-buddha/
If you believe that Buddha attained enlightenment and saw the nature of samsara,I am not sure that he would have taught any differently.
He would have refuted the Norse point of view and still taught the 4 noble truths and 8 fold noble path.He would probably have taught that the nordic gods were subject to samsara.:)
With metta.
PS.Watch the word reincarnation-that is closely associated with Hinduism.Most buddhists reject the idea of reincarnation as it implies the transmigration of an eternal soul from one body to another. The terms rebirth or re becoming are more commonly used in buddhist practice and I was recently made aware that in the Vajrayana tradition the term emanates is used as opposed to reincarnates.
With metta
Seconded.
We dont know if they were inherited into Buddhism, essential to it or later additions imported after the Buddha's death.
No, Karma is essential to Dharma. I can see why you might say ghosts and rebirth "don't belong" in dharma, but Karma is as essential and clear and indubitable as the four noble truths etc. (Im not referring to "magic" karma)
I expect he would have said the entire notion of Valhalla is wrong view and attachment to it leads to suffering and more delusion.
Mirror of Dharma versus Thor's Hammer?;)
Who knows?
How about from those who don't need to accept it as certain because they are clear there can be no certainty upon the issue and even more clear that it isn't relevant to the practice of dharma, either way.
namaste
nanadhaja, yeah the 4 noble truths and the eightfold path are the core that would stay the same. However I was wondering whether he'd teach those other things I mentioned in addition to that.
I say reincarnation instead of rebirth to separate the rebirth of ideas, feelings, thoughts and things that lead to suffering from the rebirth of human beings, especially in different realms.
I can clearly see rebirth, I can't see reincarnation or literal rebirth.
You say Buddha saw the nature of samsara.
Samsara, reincarnation and karma are discussed in the Vedas which were around before 2600 BC. They're basically the earliest known religious teachings.
You say he wouldn't teach any differently. Then samsara and rebirth (of human beings as ghosts/animals/what-have-you) would have to be pretty important. I find it hard to see how that would work.
Cloud, I haven't discarded them. They're on the side somewhere, waiting to be relevant. However, recently they have started gnawing at me.
The maths example implies that accepting and understanding reincarnation is a requirement for enlightenment. I think that karma would be more like 'BOMDAS', it's not required, but some people might need it.
Accepting something because "the Buddha said so", is accepting something without thinking, without engaging the reasoning mind. For all we know, there are teachings the Buddha gave that were meant for that specific person at that specific time and don't apply to us and may even harm our practice were we to accept them.
I'm reminded of the story of when the Buddha was approached by three men; the first, an atheist, asked him if there was a heaven and hell, the Buddha said yes. The second, a theist, asked him the same question and the Buddha said no, there is no heaven and hell. The third, an agnostic, asked him whether he thought there was a heaven and hell, the Buddha remained silent.
Taking everything the Buddha said as literal and fixed truth disallows for the fact that he taught each individual what they needed to follow the path as best as they could. By shaking up peoples pre-conceived notions, including those that they may hold regarding his own teachings, he frees the reasoning mind to look closer at what is really important.
Believing in rebirth after physical death will not lead to the ending of suffering.
Trying to fathom the fruits of karma will not lead to the ending of suffering.
Beliving in hungry ghosts, heavens, hells, gods, spirits, essences, magic, astrology and prophecy will not lead to the ending of suffering.
Accepting teachings without questioning will not lead to understanding and wisdom.
Rejecting teachings without researching them will not lead to understanding and wisdom.
Should a teacher be asking us to accept on faith that which we do not understand. Or should they be teaching us methods to formulate our own understanding?
You left out "meditation" - which is also one of the Hindu/vedic concepts. If the Buddha was born in, say, Britain would sitting in the full lotus posture and meditating been a part of his teaching of the 4NT & 8FP? I guess, we'll never know what other method He would have employed. As for me, the suttas are like tools in a toolbox - just pick out the ones you need right now for the job on hand. Don't discard the rest, there mignt come a time when you'll need them.
So yeah.... meditation is something I can see happening outside of India, since focusing on the heart and breath was sometimes used as a way to tell how much time had passed when a clock wasn't available. It just wouldn't have been known as meditation.
I have some of the same questions you do. I'm very new, so I don't presume to have answers, just suggestions.I think you'll find similar questions arising when reading other ancient religious (?) texts. For example, Christians today struggle with texts that oppose homosexuality or the equality of women. My feeling is that we need to contextualize some ideas. We can't expect that conversations Buddha had in another time and culture to transfer entirely to our modern Western zeitgeist.
I had a professor at BU who claimed to be both Christian and Buddhist. He belonged to a group called Boston Buddhists. (Can't find it on Google) He said this group had been formed because the members believed that Westerners could never properly practice an Eastern religion.
But this question itself is somewhat misleading, because the way he taught rebirth was not the same as the way it was taught in other traditions, so you could say he even went against the trends with his teachings on rebirth.
One possibility is that that he did "go against" rebirth but, in the centuries of division and split after his death, the notion became re-included in the doctrines due to any of various reasonable factors.
namaste
But mindfulness has had a big impact on my life now. With Buddhism it's a major component of a path to enlightenment. My point is, I don't think you can pull out one Buddhist practice and say it's been practiced before / elsewhere. Like most religions, Buddhism is internally coherent. That is everything in regard to practice.
Well said and absolutely true Chrysalid. The Buddha's core teachings such as the 4 Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path are verifiable for ourselves. Nobody knows for sure about rebirth and all the rest, so its pointless to speculate - and some teachers affirm that the 'realms' can be taken as different mental states that we experience.
I may have quoted this before somewhere, but as far a rebirth is comcerned, this is what Ajahn Sumedho an abbot with the Theravada Thai Forest Tradition (who focuses very much on the here and now in his teaching) has to say about rebirth in his book "The Sound of Silence":
With kind wishes,
Dazzle
I'm not rebuking Chrysalid for making a mistake because I can see how accept could be taken to mean 'embracing non-understanding'.
My purpose is to question the two parties that perhaps they in fact agree exactly with each other.
Traditionally it is used as a motivation to practice. My teacher when she first went to Tibet her teacher spent most of the time talking about the suffering of the hells. She asked him why he did this and he said that he wanted them to put a lot of energy into their practice rather than wasting time at the market or other frivolous things.
Now that she has come to teach in the west she doesn't teach this way. First of all a westerner doesn't believe in hells. Second even if you can get a westerner to believe in hell usually it will just depress them because they don't have a faith in the path to enlightenment. Rebirth is also part of that faith in enlightenment because you have a feeling that however pathetic dharma practioner you are that thats ok you have other lifetimes to improve. So in Tibet they have one teaching on rebirth to give them confidence and a second teaching to (hell/suffering, karma entangle, impermanence, precious birth) encourage them to turn away from samsara and give their practice a serious effort.
If buddha arises in the western culture he would teach the dharma that would be suited to bring a westerner to enlightenment.
Ok first I will point out that I am saying hypothetically. I don't know if rebirth and karma are true I have no idea.
But a buddha or bodhisatva will sometimes create negative karma in order to get a positive result. Some people might not agree with this but its part of the bodhisattva path and I am gathering it extends to the idea of a buddha at least in the mahayana tradition.
The bodhisatva vows are held in higher regard than the 5 or 10 precepts and so the bodhisatva if they judge it is needed might break the precepts deliberately. They are only a bodhisatva and not a buddha so they are very careful to do this and generally avoid it. The reason being that they are not omniscient and they cannot foresee the results of the action fully.
An example could perhaps be that you would kill someone who was very harmful. This is a little bit dangerous because people can take on the idea that they are a bodhisatva and create some horrible karma just based on anger and delusion rather than a skillful action.
Even a bodhisatva who is very skillful is not free from the karmic consequence. The karma may still cause the bodhisatva suffering. Perhaps on earth and perhaps in a hell realm.
So this is how it could be that hell (a lie) is used as skillful means. Hypothetically of course. There may really be a hell. I think certainly there are many shades of suffering just in earth in this universe in 2010.
Selma is pretty much blind. She works in a factory and saves all the money she makes so that her son can get a treatment to prevent him from becoming blind. He has the same genetic disease as her but there is a treatment if caught in time.
Selma's friend a police officer finds out she has money. He comes over and I forget this bit but somehow he finds where it is stashed and takes it. Selma sees this (or hears) and somehow kills him, perhaps with his own gun I forget.
She is charged with murder. She doesn't even hire a lawyer because she wants the money to go to her son. She is executed.
Now I am not saying Selma was a bodhisattva but we can see that her 'attachment' to her money and her anger at the policeman is a little more complicated than just greed.
Its a musical otherwise it would make a pretty bad movie I think. Its also worth watching if you like artsy films or music. Bjork is the lead role of selma and also plays the music. Won first place at Cannes film festival I think.
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-DAikmiIdE8?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-DAikmiIdE8?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
I think "doubt everything" must include his words?
I remember there are a fair few other places (Than just the KS) in the texts where the Buddha asks us to doubt even his own words.
My belief is that it isn't wrong dharma to doubt The Budda, it is wrong dharma to doubt the buddha and not extinguish those doubts.
namaste
The Islamic philosopher-poet Rubia Basri once wrote; Replace God with dharma and you some up my feelings quite well. I think if you're following the Buddha's path for fear of rebirth in hell or the promise of future chances to attain Buddhahood, then you're missing the point.
Bingo!
Try reading some Alfred Bloom or Jeff Wilson if you are curious to learn more about the actual tradition.
1. Suffering has infinite gradations
2. We are entangled in karma ie who knows what negative karma will ripen (see 4)
3. We have a favorable condition to practice the dharma right now. In short human. In long this is listed in depth in the Jewel Ornament of liberation all the qualities that we do have and the hindrances that we lack.
4. All of those favorable conditions are impermanent meaning that we can fall back into a deeper gradation of suffering in the future.
The teaching that we have infinite lives is based on the observation that we are not the skandas. We are the buddha nature. This nature can be observed directly in meditation according to my teacher. She is convinced from her own experiences that our true nature goes beyond birth and death. She calls this indestructible heart essence. In traditional buddhist teachings it is known as the clear luminous and unimpeded nature of mind. In other words self is not the skandas.
Therefore we don't need to get discouraged or feel hopeless.
There are other skillful means to despair such as recognizing that despair itself is just conditioned thinking. A skanda. Not the self.
It is this despair that I feel the islamic poet is truly referring to. If we are ruled by despair that is foolish. Yet indeed it is wise to practice while we have the favorable condition.
We experience this every time we meditate when we drift off. We are tempted to get caught up in despair and discouragement that we are bad meditators. When all we need to do is gently return to practice. And not worry!
I am unconvinced that your portrayal of pure land buddhism is accurate. I hope a pure land practitioner will give another opinion.
Is this true nature permanent or impermanent, according to your teacher?
It's not an all-encompassing description, no. But you will find people who believe as I have described.
I think she has said that it has never come into existence in the first place. It is not a skanda. So it is neither permanent nor impermanent. It is the unconditioned. The unborn.
She does say it is indestructible heart essence. That is a bit mysterious to me too.
There are many views on emptiness. One good book is Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness. I might have some misunderstandings myself so it may be pretty useless to question me on this topic
Just in a nutshell you know about non-self. And you imagine that emptiness is the same thing which it kind of is. Emptiness (realization) would mean that you stop grasping onto body mind objects of mind feelings as I me mine. You see that they are just thinking (from one perspective).
The third turning of the wheel of dharma is that the buddha qualities such as love should emerge when you stop grasping. Otherwise you are just at a purely intellectual level. This could be perhaps the nirvana dharma seal? You could say.
Anyhow like I say I am just a knucklehead who has been reading a bit and meditating.
Even before Shakyamuni Buddha, there was Kassapa Buddha.
Even before Kassapa Buddha there was Konagamana Buddha..
Even before... there was........
Even before Tanhankara Buddha there are even 'older' Buddhas so numerous they are more Buddhas in Nirvana than the grains of sands in the Ganges River.
An extract about Gautama Buddha/Shakyamuni Buddha from the Wikipedia:
All the Buddhas are only born when specific conditions are fulfilled such as continent, mother, father etc. One reason why Lord Buddha chose India as his birth place is probably because of the basic foundation of meditation many yogis had.
That is certainly an entirely possible way to look at it. It would seem that any effective Teacher must teach to the culture.
The only doctrine that I adhere to without question is karma, and this is karma as it is taught by Pema Chodron ...
namely that karma is the sum total of all habits, thoughts, and feelings. That every time you do, think, feel, you are either reinforcing an existing imprint, changing an existing imprint, or creating a new imprint.
From any standpoint, the sum total of our imprints, at the very least, affects how we view and interact with the world, and this in turn creates how the world interacts with us. I do not know how far into unseen areas this goes, but certainly, it operates on at least a minimal level ... if you are angry all the time, then you do indeed "live in hell". If you don't trust people, then people do not treat you in (as your perceive) trustworthy ways.
I think all Buddhas, past, present of future will be born in one specific continent:D.
Source: http://www.thisismyanmar.com/nibbana/gotama/gotama01.htm
it's quite interesting