Is Buddhism a religion?

[BlueBaby]

There was a real person who came to be referred to by that name. Others are called that as an honorarium, meaning that they experienced the same transformation in consciousness as he did. In some sense, there are no real boundaries between self and other, so Buddha is all buddhas.

I think the gifts are both a form of respect, as well as a throwback to previous religious forms.

You can indeed take the woo woo out of Buddhism and distill it to it's essence. I think Zen is a form of that. You can also be an atheist or a Buddhist and appreciate Jesus (Rajneesh wrote a good book about that).

"
Previous religious forms"? Can you explain this comment?

Buddhism is no longer a religion? Thus your use of the word "previous" Why?

Are there no "religious" practitioners only celebrity and "nondenominational" profitable Buddhism?
BB



I see all religions as watered down from a diety at their helm (originally?) to humans now at the helm. But then what are they? Are they still religions?

BB






BB

 

[spidergoat]

"
Previous religious forms"? Can you explain this comment?

Buddhism is no longer a religion? Thus your use of the word "previous" Why?

Are there no "religious" practitioners only celebrity and "nondenominational" profitable Buddhism?
BB



I see all religions as watered down from a diety at their helm (originally?) to humans now at the helm. But then what are they? Are they still religions?

BB






BB

When Buddhism spread throughout Asia, it, like Christianity, did not completely displace the previous religions, it formed a fusion. Previous religions tended to be animist, they prayed to various gods. Buddhism for laypeople, with some exceptions, became not unlike praying to a god. But the priests know better. They don't mind people treating Buddha like a god because it provides an entrance into more subtle teachings. Buddhism is a religion, but at it's essence it's not a supernatural one. Humans have always been at the helm. The most primitive religion is probably shamanism, in which natural drugs are used to change consciousness. Perhaps Buddhism is just a practice that stimulates a native chemical or set of chemicals in the brain. I think it re-organizes the brain into a new way of thinking.

I don't understand your last question.

 

[BlueBaby]

When Buddhism spread throughout Asia, it, like Christianity, did not completely displace the previous religions, it formed a fusion. Previous religions tended to be animist, they prayed to various gods. Buddhism for laypeople, with some exceptions, became not unlike praying to a god. But the priests know better. They don't mind people treating Buddha like a god because it provides an entrance into more subtle teachings. Buddhism is a religion, but at it's essence it's not a supernatural one. Humans have always been at the helm. The most primitive religion is probably shamanism, in which natural drugs are used to change consciousness. Perhaps Buddhism is just a practice that stimulates a native chemical or set of chemicals in the brain. I think it re-organizes the brain into a new way of thinking.

I don't understand your last question.

Could you explain enlightenment? Is it a part of Buddhism? Can it be scientifically proven?
BB

My last comment was simply that (I left this out of my previous post) IMHO all religions today are not about the supernatural, they are controled by the very real and natural human. So then are they even religions in the strictest sense: Theistic. I say they are the ultimate in Humanism.

I understand the argument "Duh! Ofcourse they are controled by man, there are no supernatural gods!!" But my point isn't as simple as that.
I can't explain my argument thoroughly in limited space here, nor do I want to get into it, really.

 

[Stoniphi]

I think it re-organizes the brain into a new way of thinking.

Yes.

 

[Stoniphi]

Could you explain enlightenment?

It is a deep, profound understanding that bursts upon the recipient in a flash of insight so strong that it forever changes the person, the way they see the world and interact with others.

 

[BlueBaby]

It is a deep, profound understanding that bursts upon the recipient in a flash of insight so strong that it forever changes the person, the way they see the world and interact with others.

In just Googling I get a variety of definitions. Some pretty wooeee to me. But that is the nature of the Net.

Do I have to reach a state of enlightenment to teach Buddhism?

If I reach enlightenment can I personally profit from it: Books, DVD's, paid interviews, and still call myself enlightened?

What sets my apart after this enlightenment?
BB

 

[spidergoat]

I can't explain enlightenment, it can only be experienced. It is central to Buddhism. In fact I would say it's the essence of it, the only part that matters. I could describe some experiences I had, but it wouldn't be the same. For instance I would read first hand accounts in books, but it did nothing for me. It can't be understood intellectually. But when I had such an experience, I would go back and read the accounts, and recognize what they were describing. The weirdest part is feeling like you are floating about 3 inches above the floor. I thought they were kidding about that! I'm an atheist and a skeptic, not one to believe just any new age crap. My instruction came from books, mostly Alan Watts. In fact it was a paperback edition of Watts that was the trigger for me. Not really the words, but the book itself and the act of reading it. I turned the page expecting some understanding and the next page happened to be blank. That's when it hit me what a fool I had been seeking for something that was as close as my own skin! This was accompanied by a very strange feeling of inner peace. My inner dialogue practically disappeared. I could indulge it when necessary, but mostly it was silent. It was like I saw myself from another place doing things and thinking things, but not being a part of it, a disinterested observer. Speech came spontaneously and I found myself saying unpredictable things. I drove to the mall and walked around not touching the ground (that floating feeling). I would read my Zen books and it was all perfectly clear. After that I never read another thing about it, not interested.

Can it be scientifically proven? I would suggest that Buddhism is a form of science experiment. You don't have to accept anything on faith, just try it out and see what happens. It could be an illusion, but subjectively it can have value to the person experiencing it. Or it can feel like death. We do know that perception is controlled by the brain and that the brain can change.

Religions don't have to be theistic to be religious, perhaps we are just conditioned to think so in western culture, the same way religious people say a scientific point of view is dry and uninspiring.

 

[spidergoat]

Do I have to reach a state of enlightenment to teach Buddhism?

Yes.

If I reach enlightenment can I personally profit from it: Books, DVD's, paid interviews, and still call myself enlightened?

There are no rules, do whatever you want. I think it would be somewhat distasteful to profit from it, but hey people need money.

 

[BlueBaby]

It is a deep, profound understanding that bursts upon the recipient in a flash of insight so strong that it forever changes the person, the way they see the world and interact with others.

Your definitio in post #25 sounds rather benign. Not so uncommon an experience, though a flash of insight does not necessarily result in a change for the "positive". It would be my insight, after all?

Or does it rely on grasping another's insight which has certain perameters? Certain rules or characteristics, to be considered an enlightenment?

BB

 

[BlueBaby]

I can't explain enlightenment, it can only be experienced. It is central to Buddhism. In fact I would say it's the essence of it, the only part that matters. I could describe some experiences I had, but it wouldn't be the same. For instance I would read first hand accounts in books, but it did nothing for me. It can't be understood intellectually. But when I had such an experience, I would go back and read the accounts, and recognize what they were describing. The weirdest part is feeling like you are floating about 3 inches above the floor. I thought they were kidding about that! I'm an atheist and a skeptic, not one to believe just any new age crap. My instruction came from books, mostly Alan Watts. In fact it was a paperback edition of Watts that was the trigger for me. Not really the words, but the book itself and the act of reading it. I turned the page expecting some understanding and the next page happened to be blank. That's when it hit me what a fool I had been seeking for something that was as close as my own skin! This was accompanied by a very strange feeling of inner peace. My inner dialogue practically disappeared. I could indulge it when necessary, but mostly it was silent. It was like I saw myself from another place doing things and thinking things, but not being a part of it, a disinterested observer. Speech came spontaneously and I found myself saying unpredictable things. I drove to the mall and walked around not touching the ground (that floating feeling). I would read my Zen books and it was all perfectly clear. After that I never read another thing about it, not interested.

Can it be scientifically proven? I would suggest that Buddhism is a form of science experiment. You don't have to accept anything on faith, just try it out and see what happens. It could be an illusion, but subjectively it can have value to the person experiencing it. Or it can feel like death. We do know that perception is controlled by the brain and that the brain can change.

Religions don't have to be theistic to be religious, perhaps we are just conditioned to think so in western culture, the same way religious people say a scientific point of view is dry and uninspiring.

Sorry, your description sounds wooee to me. Not to mention hard to prove scientifically. If there are no rules to enlightenment why do people seek such a random experience?


Thank you for your informative replies, by the way. I can't get answers without asking questions, even if they seem argumentative. That is not my main intention.

So, you are a Buddhist. One (mis)conception of Buddhism I had was that that meant that you have "outgrown" or are trying to outgrow anger, greed, hatred, etc. thru enlightenment? There were "standards" so to speak.
BB

Yes, religions don't have to be theistic (as I said before, I argue none are), but when we mention it in the US I gather a god and worship comes to mind most of the time.

 

[spidergoat]

I'm not a Buddhist.

Of course personal experiences are subjective and hard to prove that they happened. I don't want to prove it, just perhaps suggest that if people are interested in meditation, encourage them that it is not fruitless.

I think the "standards" are an afterthought. It's a good idea when creating a religion, as Buddha deliberately did, to include some moral teachings. Of course it's hard to take anger and hatred as seriously as I once did, since there is no longer the identification of "self" with the feelings. But anger and hatred can be valuable and I don't reject them.

 

[Aqueous Id]

Satanism too? Are their no religious practices we can be intolerant about, God?

Or feel bored and antsy. Or feel like the goal sounded creepy, this selfless nirvana.

Sins?

So you are less tolerant of Western religions who you are now judging?

Hi, Pi.

I have a problem calling Satanism a religion. It gets down to the definition, what we mean by Satanism, and what we mean by religion.

I was responding to the very ill-informed claim that Buddhists and Catholics worship objects, a narrow and pointed reference to the fundamentalist distortion of Bible text (idolatry).

Anyone who seriously believes this has been left in the dust by both Buddhists and Catholics, who would laugh at the small mind that draws conclusions like this without bothering to investigate what these people are doing in their rituals, or in their prayer or meditation.

The notion that Buddhism is frivolous or absurd just because it explores nothingness also is a demonstration of a narrow mind.

Fraggle mentioned a connection between Buddhism and Jungian philosophy. In fact, Buddhist are deeply philosophical. I would say the same of Catholics. In fact, it is that desire to achieve perfection by thinking deeply that gives these folks an edge over the fundamentalists, who still live in a flat-earth model of their God.

As for sin, I'm sure most folks here recognize that Catholics have a well developed sense of sin. The Buddhists do too. The difference, as I see it, is that the Buddhist doesn't dwell on the shame and punishment aspect of it as much, but more as a matter of ignorance - to do something wrong knowing havoc will be the result. Rid yourself of sin, and with a less troubled mind you will discover a deeper connection between yourself and the cosmos. It's all about self-improvement. But God is in there too, as a matter of choice.

Catholics do not worship candles or statues or graven images. They read the same texts in the Bible that cover idolatry, as the fundamentalists do. They understand that those scriptures prohibit idol worship, such as cutting down a tree, carving it into a fertility symbol, and then believing it is a living spirit. Catholics do not believe the statue, just because it was formed to resemble a holy object, actually takes on a spirit and becomes the saint or whoever is represented in it. Catholics surround themselves in art to help add a visual dimension to the invisible world of their faith. This has been going on since before the time of Christ. It's an ancient custom, and to denounce it as idol worship is to deny the very roots of one's own fundamentalist view of Christianity.

Fundamentalists who decry this today are just echoing an ancient rage, folks called iconoclasts. They destroyed untold treasures of history, believing they knew an idol when they saw one. Yesterday's reactionaries, I would say.

I'm not down on religion, just on superstition, ignorance, prejudice and the unending rant about myths and legends and all the denunciation of evidence that accompanies American-style Anabaptist-derived fundamentalism.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

When Buddhism spread throughout Asia, it, like Christianity, did not completely displace the previous religions, it formed a fusion.

For example, the "faith" of 21st-Century China is a fusion of motifs from Confucianism, the Dao, Buddhism and Communism. Confucianism and Communism, in particular, have made a very successful pairing because Confucius teaches us to respect our elders and not make waves (that's how China became the world's oldest continuous civilization), so when the party leaders tell them what to do, they do it. They don't mind that the "elders" get the profits, so long as their own standard of living continues to improve. That never worked in Russia and Hungary!

Could you explain enlightenment? Is it a part of Buddhism? Can it be scientifically proven?

The word has a basic meaning of "the acquisition of knowledge and/or understanding," which can be applied spiritually, scientifically, or in many contexts. Don't forget the important event in the history of us Westerners, "The Enlightenment" of the 18th century. It was a huge step forward in European and American culture. It taught us to believe in the power of human reason, and armed with that power we made very impressive innovations in politics, religion and education. Science thrived in this new culture. It's arguable whether the Industrial Revolution would have even happened without it. The same goes for the spread of democracy!

I think it would be somewhat distasteful to profit from it, but hey people need money.

Everyone has to make a living. People who provide a service should be paid for it. Duh? The better the service, the more generous the pay. This is the way we encourage the most skillful people to pursue their line of work, and encourage the others to try doing something else for a living.

Sure, it's not a perfect system. But nothing human is perfect.

 

[BlueBaby]

RE: Post #32 The idea of Catholic idolatry stems from the belief in some that a Christian prays only to the godhead, not to Mary or to saints. So when they see a statue of Mary to whom catholics pray--they are praying to a rock--a nonfunctioning help of some kind. They believe there is no supernatural help, guidence, power in Mary or any Saint, so that is why it is idolatry.

What do Catholics do in their prayer and meditation time?

Our local secular latin american community paper comes with a prayer to some saint each week and my catholic friends like to include saints' prayer cards in their letters, etc telling me to pray to this saint for this and that saint for that. How is that so far beyond any fundamentalist?

Satan is a fallen angel of the Judeo-Chr God. What is your definition of Satanism?

BB

 

[arauca]

It is a deep, profound understanding that bursts upon the recipient in a flash of insight so strong that it forever changes the person, the way they see the world and interact with others.

That is not exclusive to Buddhist. And if some will tell me Buddhism is not religion , What about the queen of heaven, she was introduced into China during Buddhism evangelization.

 

[kx000]

It is spiritual, and it is a faith, and has a following. So, yes.

 

[Search & Destroy]

If someone does Yoga, are they Hindu? What is the minimum they would have to add, if your answer is no, so that you would think they were Hindu?

No. Many people do yoga for relaxation or exercise rather than for the religious experience.

For someone to be Hindu, their core beliefs (regarding God, Purpose in life, Karma etc.) would have to be influenced by some Hindu holy book (Vedas, Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita etc.), more than another religion's ideas.

 

[Search & Destroy]

Do I have to reach a state of enlightenment to teach Buddhism?

Short answer: Yes. It's dangerous to teach meditation if you do not fully understand it yourself. The basics can be learned by anyone, and taught by many, but once you get advanced it is best to have a mentor. Foremost, this is to save time. Think about koans for example - if you don't understand them you can't create them.

If I reach enlightenment can I personally profit from it: Books, DVD's, paid interviews, and still call myself enlightened?

Yes you would still be enlightened. You wouldn't be greedy though, and your efforts would not be for material gain.

What sets my apart after this enlightenment?
BB

You won't have any free-willed thoughts running around in the back of your mind. You can still feel sad and things like that, but only if you choose. Say goodbye to anger. I went a few years without getting angry, and completely forgot what it was like. I really had to relearn the emotion because I decided it was useful.

Emotional control is the best way I can describe it. You also start to feel compassion for everything.

Animals are thought of as enlightened. Because they don't carry the weight of their ego around with them.

 

[Search & Destroy]

It is a deep, profound understanding that bursts upon the recipient in a flash of insight so strong that it forever changes the person, the way they see the world and interact with others.

This is the stereotypical enlightenment, but usually it's different.

Enlightenment is a real gradual shift that can take a whole lifetime. There are lots of stories of Buddhas 'clicking' into place in an instant and it happens. But usually there are a thousand 'clicks' before enlightenment actualizes. It's common for someone to become enlightened, and become unenlightened again back and forth many times.

 

[Stoniphi]

While it is true that to completely understand "enlightenment" one must experience it, it is on occasion necessary to describe it to the curious. "Nothing ventured, nothing gained". I am not selling anything, merely expressing (in simple terms) my knowledge and personal experience.

I also got my introduction to Buddhism through Alan Watts - the Three Pillars of Zen - which I first read in 1968 when I became a practicing Buddhist. I developed and modified my regimen over the decades to its present form which I practice daily.

On enlightenment, 2 examples of satori from my personal experience:

1)The first experience was sitting doing Zazen (classic Zen meditation, counting breaths). After about 1/2 hour of Zazen, I suddenly had an internal vision. I saw myself from above meditating, then my view rapidly receded through the ceiling and roof into the air above the house. As I continued to rise I saw the land below, then the whole planet spinning in space. The earth receded in the distance and I saw the sun and the other planets. The further out I got, the more rapid the movement. I saw the planets orbiting the sun, then the sun itself faded into the distance becoming just another bright speck in the firmament. Then I saw the galactic arm our solar system is in, then the galaxy itself in the company of other galaxies. As I receded further, the galaxies formed a curtain in the black of space, like a shimmering aurora borealis, a fabric waving in a nonexistent wind.

Then suddenly it all went into reverse and I was flying back to my origin. I was then sitting in my room again right where I started. The memory of that journey is still as clear as if it happened yesterday, I can still see the curtain of galaxies fluttering in the nebulous breeze with no difficulty whatsoever. I perceived how very very small and utterly insignificant I was in comparison to the rest of the universe and it gave me a profound sense of peace and calm that I cannot explain further except to say that it is still with me some 40+ years later.

2) In the early 1980's I had been practicing Taekwon Do for more than 10 years and was informed that it was time to test for my first degree black belt. This involved my performing some very difficult tasks before an audience of several hundred persons, many of very advanced TKD rank. One of these tasks was to run 20 feet, jump 4 feet into the air, and side kick through 7 inches of pine boards held by other martial artists. We each got 3 tries. If we failed the third try, a board was removed and we tried a 4th time. If we succeeded then, we would get the black belt but it could be taken away at any time for the next 6 months by a higher ranking person. If we failed the 4th try, we failed the test and had to wait another 2 years before we could retry.

The first try, I merely bounced off the boards. Same with the second try. I set myself up for the third attempt, closed my eyes and went to an internal place of meditation.

I was standing on a rock on the coast of a vast lake. The forest was behind me and a cool breeze in my face. I took a breath and released it slowly, considering the task before me. I took a second breath and went into the halls of my mind, searching. I released that breath and took the third breath, down in the basement of my consciousness. Before me was a big red switch, like one of those on Frankenstein's laboratory walls. I knew in an instant that it was my rage and I knew that I needed to use that to make the break, so reached up and threw that big red switch.

I opened my eyes as I released the breath, and all I saw was a red tunnel from my face to the boards, nothing else. There was no sound from the crowd, no-one else in the auditorium, I could not even see the board holders, 4 - 200 pound men. Only the boards.

Then I blacked out - no memory of the next few seconds at all, then or now. I just woke up standing in the middle of a pile of kindling scattered in a circle around me. All 4 holders were on their butts on the floor in a semi - circle before me.

My training partner later told me that when I opened my eyes I went emotionally flat. All expression left my face, I assumed a textbook ready stance, took several rapid steps, leaped into the air, rolled over onto my side while flying towards the boards and performed a perfect side kick into the center of the stack. He said when my foot hit the boards they exploded. He said that they did not appear to just break, they appeared to literally explode, with debris flying everywhere, along with the 4 big guys who had been holding the boards.

I realized that I now knew where that big red switch was. I could find it again if needed and I could turn it on....or off. Since that switch is my anger, my rage, this represents a level of self - control that I had never had before then. I can become the Hulk if I need to....or not lose my temper if I choose. This was a level of self control that was new to me then. I count on it now and use it regularly.

Each of these experiences had a profound emotional component and has changed my life. They made me different than I was before I had them and persist within me to this day. I am clear that this explanation is not the same as having the experience yourself, but you now know a little bit more about satori/enlightenment than you did before. I hope it helps.