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.
Feels wrong to call myself Buddhist
Chrysalid
Veteran
Essentially, because I don't believe in half the things that most Buddhists do. I feel bad coming along and taking a 2,500 year old religion, ignoring all the aspects I feel to be superstitious while accepting the truth of the basic teachings, it feels disrespectful to then call myself a Buddhist.
Logically I could chose to simply accept the whole package, but then I'd feel disingenuous rather than disrespectful.
Does anybody else feel as I do?
Logically I could chose to simply accept the whole package, but then I'd feel disingenuous rather than disrespectful.
Does anybody else feel as I do?
0
Comments
No. I also ignore certain aspects that I feel to be nonsensical, superstitious or later additions, but I don't feel it's disrespectful to self-identify myself as a Buddhist for the sake of convenience since I'm sincere about the practice and the parts that I do accept.
I used to not believe in anything. I was mostly just into practice as a means to better myself and make myself more useful. But this practice had such a profound effect that I increasingly realize I have no idea what's going on.
So as time goes on, I find I have an increasingly humble attitude toward the teachings. This isn't exactly faith: but, if we go to someone who we suppose has more insight than we do, we can accordingly expect that they'll say some pretty weird and surprising things.
Buddha bless,
Conrad.
Funny thing about being buddhist and calling yourself buddhist is that really "Buddhist does not exist". Neither does "Christianity, Muslim, Taoist, Catholic, ect." These are just names that we attach to. Why does water become tea just because there are the juices from plants in it? Really it is water, and plant extract. But we label it as tea. Tea, does not really exist. Am I making sense?
Most people are Buddhists without even claiming to be Buddhist. All you must "believe in" is the 4 Dharma Seals, and then you are a Buddhist. A Buddhist is just a person who believes in the fundamental teachings of the Buddha. The rest is picking and choosing what you think is most helpful to achieving Nirvana.
Dharma Seals:
All things are impermanent
All stained/divided emotions are painful.
All things are empty of inherent existence.
Nirvana is peace (between extremes).
The non-Buddhist thinks there's a difference.
That's not the point see, the point I'm making is most people are Buddhist without even knowing they are. The only reason they don't call themselves one is they're averse to putting a label on themselves.
With Metta,
Todd
What do you mean you don't name your cups?!
Yes, I feel exactly as you do and therefore do not label myself as Buddhist in my largely scientific/atheist/Christian culture. As I explored Buddhism I found what I considered to be profound, life altering truth, but it was mixed with centuries of cultural irrelevance and frankly, distortions and superstitions. Ultimately what helped me most was exploring Jungian psychology. There are remarkable parallels between central Buddhist doctrines and Jungian psychology, but the difference is that Jungian psychology is only mired in mythology as an explanatory mechanisms and isn't buried under 2600 years of tradition originating in foreign to us cultures.
In the end I find Buddhism to be at it's strongest when viewed not a a doctrine centered religion, but as a practice oriented system. Jungian analysis does a better job of presenting the theory (because it's more modern and thus easier for us to comprehend and isn't mired in centuries of culture and superstition.
The therapist I see to assist me in taking care of my emotional and psychological self is semi Buddhist. He doesn't identify with Buddhism as his primary source of religious/spiritual expression (for him it's Christianity), but he attends a couple mediation retreats each year and is on a first name basis with folks like Sharon Salzberg and other 'luminaries'.
To me Buddhism is a trap for most just like any *ism is. It is a means for the juvenile self to get caught up in 'this is right, this is wrong' thinking and to fixate into a binary us vs. them duality existence which is, of course, anathema within Buddhism.
Ultimately it is important for us to mature into fully actualized men and women and to leave the childish, underdeveloped aspects of ourselves behind like the butterfly leaves the cocoon behind. What label we give the body of knowledge and teachings that lead us to this is not really important. That we reach this stage of development for the betterment of ourselves, our families and our society is of critical importance.
Why would you need to absorb all the 'buddhism' thing, and not absorb only the things that have impact in real life ?
If you feel the need to label yourself here's some suggestion:
a) If you took and follow the 5 precepts, you could always say that you are a Buddhist, but add that you do not believe many of the things you have been told.
b) If you meditate, you could always just call yourself a mediator.
c) you could always just say that you are a person with an interest for meditation/Buddhism/spirituality etc...
I agree that I find it difficult to call myself a 'Buddhist' as I have not taken any vows or formally joined a Sangha. However, I think Buddhism can considered a philosophy, religion or lifestyle.
To me it is mainly a philosophy. Since I take philosophy seriously in the sense that it provides me with a guide to interpret existence, it is not an academic pursuit, but it directly influences my worldview and lifestyle.
It is a way of life prescribed as a means to end dukkha (pain, suffering, stress, dissatisfaction), which results in birth, aging, disease, death, and endless rebirths so long as I continue to cling, desire, lust for, and remain addicted to that which causes my suffering.
Whether it is a religion or lifestyle depends on who is practicing it. Some cultures are raised to practice Buddhism religiosticly, but this is not what Buddha taught. Buddha taught that life is dukkha: pain, suffering, stress, dissatisfaction, which results in birth, aging, disease, death and endless rebirths so long as we cling, desire, lust for, and remain addicted to that which causes our suffering.
What makes it a lifestyle and how is it different from simply following religion?
The Noble Eight Fold Path is a prescription for a life style which will result in release from this samsaric realm of birth, aging, disease, death, and rebirths (etc. as previously stated.).
It differs from a religion in that it does not require simple belief, but instead requires personal practice, validation, and verification of the consequences of our intentional actions and their results/consequences. One can then draw a corollary between what behaviors cause beneficial and non-beneficial results.
With no long tradition in the West I personally don't feel comfortable with a lot of the spiritual baggage that seems to come with Tibetan Buddhism mostly owing I think to its close links with Tibet's historical Bon religion. Bon is still practiced in over 260 monasteries in Tibet. (Worth reading around the subject as at today 2010).
As Buddhism spread to China, Thailand, Vietnam, Korea, Japan etc it took on many peculiarities of the indigenous people and their beliefs.
Therefore, in the West something similar is surely happening. I have spoken to many who are drawn to Buddhism owing to a lack in faith of a 'God' in the Christian tradition. Buddha encouraged people to take his teachings and dismantle them and test them to destruction. For me this suggests looking closely at his teachings and the core principles and not dwelling to much on what 16th century monks in Tibet or elsewhere were saying.
I know for some this is not popular and it has been suggested to me that it is wrong to reject such a great lineage of teaching. That might be true but for me I would like to see a Western tradition that encompasses our respect for democracy, freedom of speech, equal rights and tolerance etc combined with Buddhas teachings.
Does such a new tradition exist?
Just my thoughts
Clavain
UK