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.
Is this true about Lotus Sutra???
DaltheJigsaw
Mountain View Veteran
When I stumbled upon a passage in the "Lotus Sutra" that a great Buddha named Medicine Buddha wants a burning human body as the most precious sacrifice offered to him.
The Lotus Sutra is one of the most important scriptures in Buddhism (not just Tibetan) and you cannot question its authority, because it's like questiong the authority of the Bible in Christianity.
I thought, can it be real? that a great Buddha wants a burning human body as most precious thing offered to him?
And after that, I watched in a documentary some Vietnamese monks practicing this, burning their body and disintegrate it in front of the Buddha that they believe.
From: http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1321202/pg3
The Lotus Sutra is one of the most important scriptures in Buddhism (not just Tibetan) and you cannot question its authority, because it's like questiong the authority of the Bible in Christianity.
I thought, can it be real? that a great Buddha wants a burning human body as most precious thing offered to him?
And after that, I watched in a documentary some Vietnamese monks practicing this, burning their body and disintegrate it in front of the Buddha that they believe.
From: http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1321202/pg3
0
Comments
I found this on Wikipidia on the page about Thích Quảng Đức
“Despite the shock of the Western public, the practice of Vietnamese monks self-immolating was not unprecedented. Instances of self-immolations in Vietnam had been recorded for centuries, usually carried out to honor Gautama Buddha. The most recently recorded case had been in North Vietnam in 1950. The French colonial authorities had tried to eradicate the practice after their conquest of Vietnam in the 19th century, but had not been totally successful. They did manage to prevent one monk from setting fire to himself in Hue in the 1920s, but he managed to starve himself to death instead. During the 1920s and 1930s, Saigon newspapers reported multiple instances of self-immolations by monks in a matter-of-fact style. The practice had also been seen in China: in the city of Harbin in 1948, a monk seated himself in the lotus position on a pile of sawdust and soybean oil and set fire to himself in protest against the treatment of Buddhism by the communists of Mao Zedong. His heart remained intact, as did that of Thích Quảng Đức.”
I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone, would you?
:eek:
It is completely contrary to the teachings of the historical Buddha to destroy oneself by fire and to inflict such horror on others.
.
http://ichinensanzen.org/forum/index.php?board=6.0
I must admit, when I first read the chapter where Buddha Sun Moon Brilliance wraps himself in perfumed oils before setting himself alight and burning brightly and universally illuminating worlds as fully numerous as the sands of eighty kotis of Ganges rivers - burning for 1,200 years - it seemed a little strange - But when you read and begin to understand even a little of the Sutra, - it is not. Firstly, do not see this in the same eyes you would view a human sacrifice, secondly it was a self offering by Buddha Sun Moon Brilliance, thirdly.... well best you read it for yourselves.
But remember it is to be seen in terms of an eternal Buddha, not your best mate from down the road!
As for the Vietnamese comments - I don't know that this is connected to the Lotus Sutra?
I think his teachings have been "re-worked" several times over since his death, sometimes with the help of others who have reached enlightenment, perhaps sometimes by unenlightened minds. All credit given to the Buddha, of course, creating conflicts about authenticity and which path is correct. Sad in a way, useful in a way; depends on whether you get sucked into and stuck on one view to the exclusion of the possibility of all views.
IMHO whether teachings are from Siddhartha or another enlightened mind, they can teach us to see reality for what it is; after all, who says the particular way reality is expressed by Siddhartha was the only way it could be expressed, or the only method for seeing it? I have great faith in Siddhartha's teachings and methods, but to me he was just a human like the rest of us; anyone may be able to re-interpret reality with the same freedom from greed, hatred and delusion.
It's all in how your own mind works; what works for you. And still we should be mindful of these things and respect the beliefs of others as equally valid and with no greater authenticity or truth than our own, even if they are not our path. Some people are just selfish "jackasses" that make everyone else inferior to their way of practice and their beliefs, and that just isn't Buddhist behavior IMHO.
Whether a teaching is 100%, 75%, 50% in accord with reality... we can not truly know, unless we put it into practice for ourselves. So, practice!
i personally do not "question" its authority because, for me, it has no authority to begin with
single works that seek to embody the whole religion or teachings, such as the Lotus Sutra or the Vissudhimagga have little authority because they are merely works of literature
If you follow the dharma you would question all authorities, Leon, that is the starting point.
And BTW, the Lotus Suttra is nearly a thousand years and over a thousand miles removed from the time of the Buddha, an important fact for your consideration:)
namaste
Professor James A.Benn, associate professor of religion at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada, wrote about self-immolation; a Chinese Buddhist tradition dating from the late 4th century.
I wonder if he mentions the Lotus Sutra as an initial source of inspiration for it.
It must be the only sutra in which it is described?
http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/bennjam/research.html
“My first article on the topic, “Where Text Meets Flesh: Burning the Body as an ‘Apocryphal Practice’ in Chinese Buddhism” (1998), explores how texts (both apocryphal and canonical) and practices in Chinese Buddhism operated in a mutually reinforcing cycle so that doctrinal innovations spurred new modes of bodily piety while, conversely, practices that lacked textual sanction drove the creation of scripture.
The book, Burning for the Buddha, is a comprehensive study of the subject. It seeks first to place self-immolation in historical, social, ethical, cultural and doctrinal context via a thorough investigation of the practice throughout Chinese history. Second, it investigates how self-immolation was constructed as a Chinese Buddhist practice by three types of historical actors: self-immolators, their biographers, and the compilers of hagiographical collections. The book offers a detailed history of self-immolation in China from medieval times until the early twentieth century, and includes many annotated translations from primary sources.”
So for the Buddha?
Thank you!
But the practice was rare and would be condemned by most Buddhists then and now. I suspect suicide as a noble act, a sacrifice that served the land, was more of a cultural thing. It takes a culture where this is seen on the same level as a martyr is, in the West.
But speaking in admiration of monks who actually did it – and mentioning how miraculously their hearts remained intact- is giving off the wrong signal.
Maybe some poor religious maniac gets this little push he needs to follow the example.
That would be terrible.
The Lotus Sutra, on the other hand, puts forth entirely new assertions that it admits was not in the Pali Cannon. It actually dismisses parts of the Pali Cannon.