Nonbelievers and Buddhism

[Dancing David]

It's quite depressing that since the woo made its impromptu appearance thanks to NordaVinci the interesting discussion about Buddhism and skepticism has been eclipsed by people having to address all the pseudoscience. Kind of illustrates the unfortunate impact of woo...



And by doing so we would be falling into the trap discussed earlier in the thread of assuming that 'original' Buddhism was the kind of Buddhism that secular, scientifically literate people find appealing today. The available evidence strongly suggests this is not the case. Buddhism can be interpreted as a secular philosophy about improving awareness but that does not mean that's what the founder of Buddhism or the early communities were all about.

As always it is a mix, there is the oral tradition written down later and the oral tradition of the Pali canon (the monastic version, and does have some woo) but if you look for somethings like 'god deva devi' and the pali canon you get this:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="Pali+canon"+god+deva+devi&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= which would seem to iondicate the the monks might have left that stuff out.

The pali canon supposedly came about many years after the AHB died, they all got together and recited the oral tradition and then decided which part to put in.

Now the Pali canon does reference Mara, especially around one of the sucides.

But it coexisted with the other oral tradition:
1. The buddha's mother had the vision with the white elephant
2. The buddhas mother gave birth to him from her side
3. A mystic saw the 'ten thousand spoked wheel' in the footprint of Gautama and said that he would be an emperor or a mystic
4. The buddha's father kept him from the world until he went out and saw, death, sickness, old age and an arhat
5. When the buddha was a monkey, when the buddha was a tiger... etc.
6. When the buddha has enlightenment all the devi and assorted bogies did sing...
7. Mara came and tempted the buddha
8. Snails crawled up on the buddha's head to protect him from the sun
9. Buddha chided his followers for preforming petty miracles like flying
10. The buddha planted a mango seed that grew in a moment to a tree and bore fruit, and the tree still exists
11. The buddha lived on a single grain of rice a day at one point, but renounced mortification

And those are just some of them:

One the Plai canon is supposedly the teachings of Siddhārtha Gautama written 300 years after his death.
the other is the oral tradition taht started at the time of teh AHb and continued on.

 

[Dancing David]

An excellent segue from a hideous derail back to the topic. Thank you.

I agree about the evidence... It doesn't really appear that the early (or even modern traditional) Buddhists considered it merely a philosophy and way of life, but also their religion. Most early cultures were centered around religion anyway, and I'm sure Siddhartha Guantanamo (sp?) was probably raised practicing some form of Hindu. I wonder if he referred to himself as Hindu/Buddhist?

Well he was allegedly raised a brahmin, and supposedly practiced as a woodland asetic for many years, so he would fall smack in the middle of the hindu religion and be placed in the top caste.

However supposedly he overturned much of the hindu faith at the time
1. He said that there is no atman
2. He enouraged his followers to give up the trappings of the hindu faith, in specific the 'fire' rituals
3. He tried to get around the caste system
4. Under duress from his mother he admitted women in the sangha

BTW: I do believe that there are many buddhists who have inspired the woo of certain other buddhists. So the derail was very appropriate.

 

[iknownothing]

I'm sure Siddhartha Guantanamo (sp?) was probably raised practicing some form of Hindu. I wonder if he referred to himself as Hindu/Buddhist?

I kind of see him kind of like the Founding Fathers. When they wrote the constitution, they didn't expect that they had the perfect answer for everything, so they allowed for ways to amend it. Great framework, but awareness of their own limitations and the fact that the country's needs would change over time. I think Buddha always encouraged people to make their own amendments. Would/could he have foreseen what direction those amendments might take hundreds or thousands of years later? I don't think so. But he doesn't seem to have felt threatened by the possibility.

 

[NordaVinci]

Here's a short experience that really happened:

I was leading a 15 minute meditation with about in attendance at the Family Federation for World peace and Unification Center in Flushing NY. It's about one block from the Won Buddhism Center, and also the Soka Gokkai Center. It was in the evening. The method of meditation is reputed to be the Original Method of Buddha (Opening Hypothesis). The Church director, Rev. Chang was born in Japan from Chinese parents. His father was a Confucian priest. His wife, Mrs. Chang, was born in Hong Kong.

I felt inspired to say at the beginning before we began meditating, that the focus of that particular meditation would be to liberate John the Baptist. We meditated for 15 minutes. At the end, I felt inspired to say that now John the Baptist groups would more easily unite with the center of the providence.

Rev. Chang, when he heard me say that, he smirked and said sarcastically(as though I were full of woo), "How can you say that?!?!?"

Just then the phone rang. It was a Korean Buddhist man who lived in Flushing. We didn't know him. He didn't know us. He wanted to come over for a visit. He arrived in about 10 minutes, introduced himself, and then pointed to my heart and touched my chest, saying, "Peter has a pure heart." Then he left.

Rev. Chang announced to everybody at Sunday service that Peter's meditation is very good and everybody should try it. .....But nobody did.

Then shortly Rev. Moon sent this man to Taiwan to be in charge of a Buddhist group that has accepted Rev. Moon as the Matreya Buddha.

The above is a true experience....One of many of course. Comments....?

 

[dafydd]

Here's a short experience that really happened:

I was leading a 15 minute meditation with about in attendance at the Family Federation for World peace and Unification Center in Flushing NY. It's about one block from the Won Buddhism Center, and also the Soka Gokkai Center. It was in the evening. The method of meditation is reputed to be the Original Method of Buddha (Opening Hypothesis). The Church director, Rev. Chang was born in Japan from Chinese parents. His father was a Confucian priest. His wife, Mrs. Chang, was born in Hong Kong.

I felt inspired to say at the beginning before we began meditating, that the focus of that particular meditation would be to liberate John the Baptist. We meditated for 15 minutes. At the end, I felt inspired to say that now John the Baptist groups would more easily unite with the center of the providence.

Rev. Chang, when he heard me say that, he smirked and said sarcastically(as though I were full of woo), "How can you say that?!?!?"

Just then the phone rang. It was a Korean Buddhist man who lived in Flushing. We didn't know him. He didn't know us. He wanted to come over for a visit. He arrived in about 10 minutes, introduced himself, and then pointed to my heart and touched my chest, saying, "Peter has a pure heart." Then he left.

Rev. Chang announced to everybody at Sunday service that Peter's meditation is very good and everybody should try it. .....But nobody did.

Then shortly Rev. Moon sent this man to Taiwan to be in charge of a Buddhist group that has accepted Rev. Moon as the Matreya Buddha.

The above is a true experience....One of many of course. Comments....?

Your point being? Does this charming anecdote have anything to do with the thread? The Rev's bank account is getting bigger?

 

[MikeSun5]

Comments....?

No.

 

[MikeSun5]

Well he was allegedly raised a brahmin, and supposedly practiced as a woodland asetic for many years, so he would fall smack in the middle of the hindu religion and be placed in the top caste.

Interesting. So I wonder if his intention was to create a substitute religion for Hindu, or a philosophy that could be used in conjunction with it.

BTW: I do believe that there are many buddhists who have inspired the woo of certain other buddhists. So the derail was very appropriate.

That's where I disagree. The Buddhists that cling to this non-existant relationship between ancient mysticism and advanced modern physics are betraying both a legitimate science AND the teachings of Buddha and his followers. This conversation centered on the atheistic/agnostic aspects of Buddhism, not ignorantly convoluting two opposing ideas. I think that derail was inappropriate and EXTREMELY frustrating. Not to mention revealing.

 

[Complexity]

The above is a true experience....One of many of course. Comments....?

Unmitigated woo.

Worthless and damaging.

 

[Meadmaker]

Interesting. So I wonder if his intention was to create a substitute religion for Hindu, or a philosophy that could be used in conjunction with it.

The Buddha was very anti-Hindu. (Or anti-Brahmanic religion. I'm not sure the two terms are exactly the same thing, since I know close to nothing about Hinduism. I read a passing reference somewhere that said that what we call Hinduism didn't develop until several centuries after the Buddha. Whatever the dominant religion was in his area, though, he was against it.)

 

[NordaVinci]

Well, hmmm, I wonder, does anybody on this thread about "nonbelievers and Buddhism" actually have any experiences which relate to the thread that they would like to share?

 

[dafydd]

Well, hmmm, I wonder, does anybody on this thread about "nonbelievers and Buddhism" actually have any experiences which relate to the thread that they would like to share?

No,atheism and Buddhism have nothing to do with each other.

 

[NordaVinci]

No,atheism and Buddhism have nothing to do with each other.

Heh,heh, well I have plenty of Japanese Buddhist friends who think otherwise. Anyway it might be well to remember that "dogma divides, mission unites" .....meaning that disagreeing parties can still work together for a common cause.

 

[Meadmaker]

Well, hmmm, I wonder, does anybody on this thread about "nonbelievers and Buddhism" actually have any experiences which relate to the thread that they would like to share?

As a Buddhist, I would sit very still and try to concentrate on my breath.

 

[Dancing David]

Well, hmmm, I wonder, does anybody on this thread about "nonbelievers and Buddhism" actually have any experiences which relate to the thread that they would like to share?

In terms of ?

 

[dafydd]

Heh,heh, well I have plenty of Japanese Buddhist friends who think otherwise. Anyway it might be well to remember that "dogma divides, mission unites" .....meaning that disagreeing parties can still work together for a common cause.

Your Japanese Buddhist friends are mistaken.I assume that they are Pure Land Buddhists,and Pure Landism is a long way from the original teachings of the Buddha.

 

[NordaVinci]

As a Buddhist, I would sit very still and try to concentrate on my breath.

10 minute break at work .....2 min. left. This basic experience of mindful breath is described by the AUM in Hinduism. Is it the same for Buddhism which also reveres the AUM...differently or the same? I don't know.

 

[dafydd]

Does this thread have a point?

 

[blobru]

Does this thread have a point?

Only those who can find a point to this thread will achieve nirvana.

 

[dafydd]

10 minute break at work .....2 min. left. This basic experience of mindful breath is described by the AUM in Hinduism. Is it the same for Buddhism which also reveres the AUM...differently or the same? I don't know.

What have the American Union Of Metalworkers got to do with it?

 

[CKava]

As always it is a mix, there is the oral tradition written down later and the oral tradition of the Pali canon (the monastic version, and does have some woo) but if you look for somethings like 'god deva devi' and the pali canon you get this:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="Pali+canon"+god+deva+devi&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= which would seem to iondicate the the monks might have left that stuff out.

The pali canon supposedly came about many years after the AHB died, they all got together and recited the oral tradition and then decided which part to put in.

Now the Pali canon does reference Mara, especially around one of the sucides.

But it coexisted with the other oral tradition:
1. The buddha's mother had the vision with the white elephant
2. The buddhas mother gave birth to him from her side
3. A mystic saw the 'ten thousand spoked wheel' in the footprint of Gautama and said that he would be an emperor or a mystic
4. The buddha's father kept him from the world until he went out and saw, death, sickness, old age and an arhat
5. When the buddha was a monkey, when the buddha was a tiger... etc.
6. When the buddha has enlightenment all the devi and assorted bogies did sing...
7. Mara came and tempted the buddha
8. Snails crawled up on the buddha's head to protect him from the sun
9. Buddha chided his followers for preforming petty miracles like flying
10. The buddha planted a mango seed that grew in a moment to a tree and bore fruit, and the tree still exists
11. The buddha lived on a single grain of rice a day at one point, but renounced mortification

And those are just some of them:

One the Plai canon is supposedly the teachings of Siddhārtha Gautama written 300 years after his death.
the other is the oral tradition taht started at the time of teh AHb and continued on.

The Pali canon has much more than just Mara in it. Naga's are there, Devas, Buddha travels to heaven to see his dead mother and teaches various Indian deities. There are numerous accounts of miraculous events and abilities and there are also sections dealing with magical chants to protect from snake bites and other such things. Searching for 'deva' and pali text on google doesn't really cut it for doing a textual analysis of the contents of the Pali canon.

Well he was allegedly raised a brahmin, and supposedly practiced as a woodland asetic for many years, so he would fall smack in the middle of the hindu religion and be placed in the top caste.

However supposedly he overturned much of the hindu faith at the time
1. He said that there is no atman
2. He enouraged his followers to give up the trappings of the hindu faith, in specific the 'fire' rituals
3. He tried to get around the caste system
4. Under duress from his mother he admitted women in the sangha

BTW: I do believe that there are many buddhists who have inspired the woo of certain other buddhists. So the derail was very appropriate.

Traditional accounts of the Buddha have him coming from a non-Brahman background. There is some debate over whether the caste system is likely to have been in effect in his area but his family seem to have been closer to the 'warrior' ksatriya class than anything else.

As far as opposing the brahman traditions that is true but he wasn't the only one. There were a whole bunch of groups which rejected the Vedas and Brahmanic authority called the 'sramana' movements, Buddhism was one and so was Jainism but there were a whole bunch including 'hedonists'. The traditional tale of why he permitted women to enter the sangha was because of repeated requests from his disciple Ananda, not his mother?

Interesting. So I wonder if his intention was to create a substitute religion for Hindu, or a philosophy that could be used in conjunction with it.

Given the patchy evidence it is hard to tell and he certainly borrowed elements from the Vedic traditions. Yet he was extremely critical of the traditional Vedic practices and brahmins in general, many Buddhist tales are at the expense of brahmins or involve them seeing the error of their ways. It's also quite clear he was clearly advocating a very different kind of religious teaching so I'd say it would be more replacement than accommodation. In the end though Buddhism remained focused on the perennial Indian religious concern of 'escaping samsara' so maybe it wasn't completely innovative!

Your Japanese Buddhist friends are mistaken.I assume that they are Pure Land Buddhists,and Pure Landism is a long way from the original teachings of the Buddha.

Most Buddhists in Japan would identify themselves as non-religious atheists. Belief is not the only measure that is used to determine religious affliation across the world. And once again, I have to ask, 'the original teachings of the Buddha'... where would one locate those?