Buddhism: Neither Theistic nor Atheistic

Eudaimonist said:

If you want to be insulted, you will be. You may want to keep in mind that what Jane the Bane described is precisely how Buddhism is understood in the West. It's not like she is trying to intentionally distort anything.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Click to expand...

It's how Buddhism is perceived in the West by atheists looking to further their own agenda and by self-help gurus looking to make a quick buck.

So here we have a religion containing the features of crippling original sin, bankrupt and worthless selfhood, salvation by passive faith in the vicarious sufferings of a redeemer (actually a whole stable of them, as in the Catholic calendar of saints), and all of this derived from an infallible scripture, not from one's own cherished intuitions. What is this religion? Buddhism. Christianity. Take your pick. If you prefer something less complex, something more self-reliant, you can always find revamped, streamlined versions of either religion. But, as they stand, neither is all that much different from the other in broad outline. When Maryanne embraced what she called Buddhism as an alternative to Christianity, she had merely exchanged six of one for half a dozen of the other, though she didn't know about at least three of them!

One might contend that Mahayana is a corrupt form of Buddhism, one that has lost sight of the vision of its Founder, whereas Christianity's corresponding doctrines are in continuity with the central vision of its Founder. But this is the worst kind of special pleading. If it happened to the one, it would be surprising if it hadn't happened to the other, too. Max Scheler thought that both religions inevitably suffered the same fate because of the ever-recurrent pattern of religions that exalt a charismatic founder. The founder is first lionized because of his summons for all to follow him in the heroic path. He dies, and the followers form a sectarian community, living out his heroic ethic, necessarily in alienation from the conventional world around them. But time passes and no one finds it any more so easy to live at such a fever pitch of piety and social radicalism. They come to assimilate themselves to the world again, rationalizing this by means of deifying the founder. Now that the life style he taught seems so far beyond the reach of even believers, they conclude his own heroic life must have been the result of his being a superhuman god. Thus no one can be expected to emulate him, and his heroism ceases to be a role-model. Instead, the believers come to regard it as an act done on their behalf so as to absolve them of the sin of not being able to do it! Mediocrity, here we come! And then Luther, Shinran, and the others start in trying to eliminate any vestige of self-effort as impious, even though at first it had been the very basis of the founder's teaching! Such a decline, plainly recognized, at least on some level, in Buddhism, is more characteristic neither of Christianity nor of Buddhism.

Why had my wife's friend been oblivious of all this? My guess is that, like many today, she had really adopted some form of Western pop self-realization therapy and, ironically, called it Buddhism. Harvey Cox foresaw this trivializing trend in his 1977 book Turning East. Shirley MacLaine can call it Buddhism, like Jim Bakker calls his religion Christianity, but neither is fooling me.

It might be better to do what Herman Hesse advocated in his novel Siddhartha: follow the Buddha's path not by slavishly aping him, but by striking out on your own authentic dharma just as he did. How else are you to imitate a great non-conformist except by refusing to conform to him? Have the courage of your own convictions! Don't hide behind supposed authorities by bottling your own product and putting the Buddhist (or Christian) label on it.
http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/art_buddi.htm

Click to expand...

The same texts that provide the moral and ethical teachings of Buddha encourage taking spiritual refuge in him as the Awakened One as well. It's special pleading to assume that the Buddha's moral teachings were accurately preserved while his teachings about himself were not:

In all the great world religions, God is regarded as the Supreme Being, who is worthy of veneration and worship. It is similar with Buddha.

Firstly, we should note that the term customarily used by many of his disciples in the scriptures when addressing the Buddha is "Bhagavat" - which means "The Blessed One" or Lord. It would have been linked with the idea of the Divine ("Ishvara") by the Indians of his time. This alone gives us an indication of the highest regard in which he was held. In fact, when the Buddha was born on earth, the "gods" (devas) all bowed down before this "god of gods", as the Buddha himself relates in the Lalitavistara Sutra (pp. 174-175):

"When I was born, the three thousand worlds were shaken: Shakra and Brahma [great gods], the asuras [Titans], the mahoragas [great snake-like beings], Chandra [the moon] and Surya [the sun], as well as Vaisravana and Kumara, all bowed their heads at my feet and did homage to me. What god is so distinguished by his superiority over me ...? I am the god above the gods, superior to all the gods; no god is like me - how could there be a higher?"

When the infant Buddha was taken to the temple of the gods, a miraculous event occurred: all the statues of the gods rose from their plinths, and bowed down before baby Buddha. The Lalitavistara Sutra (pp. 175-176) memorably relates this wonder:

"As soon as the Bodhisattva set his right foot in the temple, the statues of the gods, including Shiva, Skanda, Narayana, Kubera, Chandra, Surya, Vaisravana, Shakra, Brahma, the Guardians of the World, and others, rose from their places and bowed at the feet of the Bodhisattva (i.e. the Buddha-to-be)."

When we turn to other sutras too, we find numerous instances of worship of Buddha. In the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, for example, human devotees of the Lord bow down before him when they are in his presence and display the greatest veneration. The following is just one example out of many from that scripture, and tells of how a host of great Bodhisattvas (aspirant Buddhas) behaved when they approached Lord Buddha himself:

"They sped to where the Buddha was, walked around him 100,000 times, folded their hands, [and] paid homage ..." (The MPNS, Vol. 1, p. 10).

Not only humans worship the Buddha, but gods and animals too, as the same Mahaparinirvana Sutra again makes clear. We read of the many offerings which the heavenly beings (the "gods") make to Buddha as the latter prepares to leave his physical body:

"All the devas [gods] up to the highest heaven were gathered there [before Buddha]. At that time, Great Brahma [a major god] and other devas put forth light which shone over the four lands. To the men and devas of the world of desire, the lights of the sun and moon were all hidden. They had bejewelled hanging-ensigns, banners and parasols of coloured silk [as offerings to Buddha] ... They came to where the Buddha was, touched his feet with their heads, and said to him: 'O Bhagavat, O Tathagata! Have pity and accept our last offerings." (ibid, p. 19).
http://www.nirvanasutra.net/buddhaandgod2.htm

Click to expand...

nightflight said:

Well, both religions teach salvation (or enlightenment) by grace; however there was an historical Jesus; I can't say the same for Amida.

Click to expand...

Have you read any good biographies on the life of Buddha? This should be done before deciding, Jesus or Buddha, who you will trust for your salvation.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/261448.The_Awakened_One

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show...uddha?from_search=true&search_version=service

Whereas Christianity promises a heaven for after you die, Buddhism can help to provide you inner peace in this life:

In the moment we receive SHINJIN we feel relief, like escaping a great weight and problem. We know that we will become Buddhas no matter how we are now. We are able to feel this relief and joy many times in our life, no matter that sometimes it is covered by the everyday difficulties and sorrows. Imagine that you are in a prison and somebody in which you trust 100% assured you that you will be released in one year or a few years. That one year you are still in prison is of course difficult, but you also know for sure that your day of freedom will soon come. So you are able to feel relief and joy remembering your assurance, no matter how hard your everyday life in prison is.
http://web.mit.edu/stclair/www/ten_benefits.html

Click to expand...

Great Joy: Joy of encountering Amida, the transcendent and the infinite, is the feeling of ultimate fulfillment and contentment. It is a "pure" emotion in the sense that it is not mixed with self - centered illusory passions.

the true One Mind is the mind of Great Joy; the mind of Great Joy is the true shinjin....
- Kyogyoshinsho, chap. on Faith

When one hears Amida's Name, rejoices in faith even once....
- Larger Sutra

When ordinary, unenlightened beings, who are eternally sunk in samsara, hear through the Vow's empowerment the Name of true virtue and attain the supreme faith, they will have great joy and dwell in the stage of non- retrogression.
- Monruijusho

Those still clinging to self-power while outwardly entrusting themselves to Amida's power fail to attain Great Joy. Those who perform the exclusive Nembutsu practice while entertaining mixed and divided minds do not have Great Joy.
- Kyogyoshinsho, chap. on Transformed Buddha
http://www.nembutsu.info/6steps.htm

Click to expand...

nightflight said:

Shin Buddhism is about reliance on Amida Buddha and his vow to save all who call upon him. If he wasn't a real person, then that is a problem. However there are modern Shin Buddhists who are comfortable with a metaphorical understanding; I just eventually couldn't do it. In fact there is great debate over this issue; its not just myself.

Click to expand...

I think that you are misunderstanding the issue. There is a difference between saying that Amida Buddha is a purely mythological contruct and saying that Amida is ultimately symbolic of something that is enduringly and profoundly real.

What did Shinran himself say on the matter? -

As the essential purport of the Vow, [Amida] vowed to bring us all to become supreme Buddha. Supreme Buddha is formless, and because of being formless is called jinen. Buddha, when appearing with form, is not called supreme nirvana. In order to make it known that supreme Buddha is formless, the name Amida Buddha is expressly used; so I have been taught. Amida Buddha fulfills the purpose of making us know the significance of jinen.
http://shinranworks.com/letters/lamp-for-the-latter-ages/5-2/

Click to expand...

Ultimately, as Shin Buddhists, we are placing our faith in the eternal Buddha. Whether Dharmakara is a historical person or not, he is, according to Shinran, representative of the eternal Buddha to whom we give trust for our salvation.

We know that Gautama historically existed, and as Buddhists, we believe that he also was a manifestation of the eternal Buddha.

nightflight said:

I still have a fondness for the religion. But I have to admit that I was using Amida as a proxy for Christ (until that stopped working).

Click to expand...

Did you ever read The Tannisho or any of Shinran's writings? I recommend The Tannisho: A Resource for Modern Living by Alfred Bloom. Bloom does a good job of explaining that, even if the Pure Land sutras aren't meant to be interpreted 100% literally, it is the eternal Buddha to whom we give our faith and trust.

For a true Buddhist, Jesus is not a substitute for the eternal Buddha, though the historical Jesus was likely a very enlightened man. I am only saying these things so that I can better understand where you are coming from.

nightflight said:

I think Christianity can provide inner peace if grace is stressed. More often than not its law that's preached as the way to salvation/enlightenment.

Click to expand...

Has Buddhism taught you anything about practices and ways of thinking that will help you find peace of mind in this life, in the here and now?

This video explains how Pure Land teachings can help us find peace in this life:

Shinran taught that our birth in the Pure Land is assured the moment we accept faith in Amida's Vow. Because of this, we can experience the peace of Amida in this world, in this lifetime. This doesn't mean that we will never suffer or that we will be euphorically happy, but we will learn to have a more peaceful state of mind.

This is a feature film on the life of Buddha. Click on "CC" to view English subtitles.

nightflight said:

The problem is I can't be sure there ever was an Amida. I'm sure there was an historical Jesus and have good reason for believing he rose from the dead.

Click to expand...

How many times and in how many different ways should one explain that Amida Buddha is the same eternal Buddha that manifested as the historical Gautama and the same eternal Buddha that is within all things and beings?

nightflight said:

A modernist interpretation. But back when Shinran was roaming the countryside he told the peasants, fishermen, hunters and other plain folk about a man named Dharmakara who through countless eons became a Buddha we know as Amida.

A literal human being who became a literal Buddha. I have doubts about that though. But if I am wrong, I'm sure Amida won't be mad.

Click to expand...

Again, this is the words of Shinran himself:

As the essential purport of the Vow, [Amida] vowed to bring us all to become supreme Buddha. Supreme Buddha is formless, and because of being formless is called jinen. Buddha, when appearing with form, is not called supreme nirvana. In order to make it known that supreme Buddha is formless, the name Amida Buddha is expressly used; so I have been taught. Amida Buddha fulfills the purpose of making us know the significance of jinen.
http://shinranworks.com/letters/lamp-for-the-latter-ages/5-2/

Click to expand...

Are you familiar with the deeper meaning of what Shinran taught regarding Amida Buddha?

Granted the background ‘sutra/story’ telling us about the origin of Dharmakara’s intention – manifested through his Vows and the resulting enlightenment described as a “Pure Land” also make it difficult to avoid thinking that Amida Buddha is a ‘person’ and the ‘Pure Land’ as a ‘place.’ However, Shinran Shonin goes to great length throughout his writings to emphasize over and over that Amida Buddha is a Compassionate manifestation of the nameless, formless, incomprehensible Reality called the Dharma-kaya. In other words, Amida Buddha is the means by which we are made to be aware of this formless Reality. It is not by any ‘practice’ or doing on our side. We ‘receive’ this awareness in the same way that we hear or receive someone calling our name.

In his writing on the subject of ‘Jinen-Honi,’ written when Shinran was at the age of eighty-eight he says: Jinen signifies being made so from the very beginning. Amida’s Vow is, from the very beginning, designed to bring each of us to entrust ourselves to it—saying “Namu-amida-butsu”—and to receive us into the Pure Land; none of this is through our calculation. Thus, there is no room for the practicer to be concerned about being good or bad. This is the meaning of jinen as I have been taught.

As the essential purport of the Vow, [Amida] vowed to bring us all to become supreme Buddha. Supreme Buddha is formless, and because of being formless is called jinen. Buddha, when appearing with form, is not called supreme nirvana. In order to make it known that supreme Buddha is formless, the name Amida Buddha is expressly used; so I have been taught. Amida Buddha fulfills the purpose of making us know the significance of jinen.

- The Collected Works of Shinran, Vol. 1, Jodo Shinshu Hongwanji-ha, Kyoto. Shin Buddhism Translation Series, p. 427-428.

The connection with the Shakyamuni Buddha’s statement of “make of yourselves a Light” is that each of us needs to hear, understand, awaken to, the message being sent to us, through the manifestation of the Amida Buddha, which is primarily through the Name – Namo Amida Butsu. The use of a Name is purposely done to keep us from objectifying the Amida Buddha. In another way, we can say that Amida Buddha and the Name are like the Zen reference of the finger pointing to the moon. The important point of this metaphor is to remember that the focus should not stop at the finger, but continue on until we see what the finger is pointing at, namely, the moon which represents supreme enlightenment itself. Any form, even the form of a Buddha “ is not called supreme nirvana” according to Shinran. That is because form is like the finger pointing to the moon. It is only the means to make us aware of the moon.
http://www.sacbc.org/index.php/teachings/minister-s-message/307-the-last-teaching-of-the-buddha

Click to expand...

Do you believe in the Other-Power, do you believe in the Eternal Buddha's promise of salvation?

The belief that Jesus physically resurrected is no more historically attested than the belief that Buddha ascended into the sky and spewed fire and water from his body, showing his power over the elements.

John was the last gospel to be written, and 1 Corinthians is the oldest mention of the resurrection in the New Testament. The accounts of Jesus' resurrection, from a literary perspective, evolved over time. When Paul writes that Jesus rose as a life-giving spirit, and that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, that sounds like resurrection in a spiritual sense.

I am familiar with all the arguments in favor of Jesus' physical resurrection from the dead, but I stopped believing them when I started reading Marcus Borg about six years ago. 1 Corinthians 15 suggests that Jesus rose in a spiritual, not physical, sense, which would explain why he was able to walk through walls and ascend into heaven.

Most historians agree that the Buddha existed. It's a matter of faith whether or not the Buddha attained enlightenment as Buddhists today understand the term, but I think it's evidenced by the unique way he was able to explain the nature of reality and how to find true peace in life.

Buddha lived almost six hundred years before Christ, and almost everything claimed about Jesus was already said about Buddha, including that he's the light of the world, has power over death, etc. The main difference, however, is that while Christians believe that Jesus is the only son of god who came down from heaven, Buddhists believe that Buddha was an awakened man who fulfilled what is potential in all of us, and that we can become Buddhas someday as well by trusting in his example.

I have a thorough knowledge of what evangelicals, Eastern Orthodox, Catholic and mainline Protestant Christians believe and why, but I don't think that most American Christians know what Buddhists believe and why they believe it. I am only pointing this out because when you grow up in a culture in which your religion is dominant, you're not seriously challenged to understand what other religions teach and why they teach it, and what the origins are of your own religion's teachings.

It's just like how Muslims in Saudi Arabia are Muslim because they are Saudi Arabian, or orthodox Jews in Israel are Orthodox Jews because they are Israeli.

I don't believe that any one religion has an exclusive claim on the truth, but if one is going to claim that their religion is the only way, then they should first at least understand the historical foundations of their own religion and how their doctrines originated.

I don't know if a Christian with honest certainty can say that Jesus is the only way to salvation when someone like Buddha lived 600 years before Jesus, has had as much of an impact on world history as Jesus has, and who made some serious claims about his own identity and what he had discovered about how humans can find peace. Of course, I am not saying that Buddha is the only way, I am only pointing out the fact that most American Christians don't much about him or the religion that is based on him.

smaneck said:

Again, does 'real' equate with historic? Could Amida Buddha not be real outside of history?

Click to expand...

If Amida Buddha is the eternal Buddha who manifested as Shakyamuni and is the potential Buddhahood within all people, if Amida Buddha is the personification of Nirvana itself, then Amida Buddha is neither historical nor unhistorical: Amida Buddha is trans-historical.

The only proof necessary for the existence of Amida Buddha is the personal experinece of the Nembutsu follower who earnestly calls on his name. Those who claim that Amida doesn't exist must explain the accounts of his followers throughout history who've witnessed the Pure Land for themselves.

Even in the texts of the earlier Theravada Buddhist school, Lord Buddha (Shakyamuni) had spoken about many past buddhas that existed before himself. These past buddhas are trans-historical buddhas, which means that their stories occurred long ago in an age that predates our own time period and therefore crosses beyond the limits of our own recorded human history.
http://jadeturtlerecords.blogspot.com/2011/12/infinite-buddhas.html

Click to expand...

jacknife said:

Are there versions of Buddhism that believe in deity's?

Click to expand...

Did you read this? -

http://www.tricycle.com/blog/god-or-human