-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Buddhist...?
- Thread starter xkatz
- Start date
Taking refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, traditionally.
And if at all possible, engaging in endless elaborations about what those three terms mean from then on.
More specifically, I would say that a Buddhist is someone who decided that the Four Noble Truths are true and learned to describe them in his own words. While it is not traditionally demanded that a Buddhist should be capable of speaking about his beliefs and explaining them, I feel that to be highly advisable .
And if at all possible, engaging in endless elaborations about what those three terms mean from then on.
More specifically, I would say that a Buddhist is someone who decided that the Four Noble Truths are true and learned to describe them in his own words. While it is not traditionally demanded that a Buddhist should be capable of speaking about his beliefs and explaining them, I feel that to be highly advisable .
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friend xkatz,
Traditionally when someone follows a certain path or idealism is said to be a follower of that path or idealism like those who follow gautam's path are labelled buddhists. Those who follow Karl Marx are labelled *communists* and within that in India those communists who follow Kanu Sanyal are labelled *naxalites* [right wing communists].
As friend LD stated guess a buddhists is a buddhists when he is able to understand , explain whatever he follows and why he follows it not only to himself but to others as well.
Love & rgds
Traditionally when someone follows a certain path or idealism is said to be a follower of that path or idealism like those who follow gautam's path are labelled buddhists. Those who follow Karl Marx are labelled *communists* and within that in India those communists who follow Kanu Sanyal are labelled *naxalites* [right wing communists].
As friend LD stated guess a buddhists is a buddhists when he is able to understand , explain whatever he follows and why he follows it not only to himself but to others as well.
Love & rgds
Ilusory as it is, there is still a practical use for that distinction.
Engyo
Prince of Dorkness!
My own personal definition of myself as a Buddhist comprises two parts: First, that I have (as mentioned above) taken refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, and understand/identify with the Four Noble Truths/Eightfold Path. Secondly, that I practice.
It is a personal conceit that anyone can identify as a Buddhist, but far fewer actually practice Buddhism.
It is a personal conceit that anyone can identify as a Buddhist, but far fewer actually practice Buddhism.
xkatz
Well-Known Member
This is a problem I seem to notice w/ people who adapt it in the West sometimes.
Last edited:
groovyable
Member
''what makes a Buddhist, Buddhist?''
A very good question. To accept the Three Jewels; Taking refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. And understanding the true nature of life. Yet these concepts are not totally necessary, by searching for enlightenment and truth one can fully be on the path without even knowing- which is a prime example.
'If a man's faith is unsteady, if he does not know the true law, troubled, his knowledge will never be perfect'
A very good question. To accept the Three Jewels; Taking refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. And understanding the true nature of life. Yet these concepts are not totally necessary, by searching for enlightenment and truth one can fully be on the path without even knowing- which is a prime example.
'If a man's faith is unsteady, if he does not know the true law, troubled, his knowledge will never be perfect'
Last edited:
That would be quite the contradiction, wouldn't it?
xkatz
Well-Known Member
Indeed. The way many Westerners embrace Buddhism/Buddha Dharma makes me somewhat hesitant to look into it more.
Last edited:
Engyo
Prince of Dorkness!
That wouldn't make me hesitate, but it would make me much more inclined to do my homework before going beyond the introductory phase with any given sangha or teacher.
Of course, and in this case, that is the premise. One can hardly separate Buddha's teachings of what they teach.
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friends,
Could we now try and understand what is buddhism?
Buddhism is all about a way to be a buddha.
Does Gautama have a proprietary right to buddhism?
No, if he did he will not be *THATHAGAT*.
Besides ALL paths are NO paths to be a buddha.
So now, what makes a buddhist, buddhists?
Anyone who walks the path to be a buddha is a buddhist and to remain a buddhists one should practice constantly towards being a buddha.
What is that?
Dharma.
What is dharma?
laws of existence.
how does one practice or what does it mean to practice the laws of existence?
Just by being AWARE that one is a part of of the whole environment that one is IN.
Wakeful living is all that is required to walk the path to be a buddha or one who is no more or being Thathaghat.
Love & rgds
Could we now try and understand what is buddhism?
Buddhism is all about a way to be a buddha.
Does Gautama have a proprietary right to buddhism?
No, if he did he will not be *THATHAGAT*.
Besides ALL paths are NO paths to be a buddha.
So now, what makes a buddhist, buddhists?
Anyone who walks the path to be a buddha is a buddhist and to remain a buddhists one should practice constantly towards being a buddha.
What is that?
Dharma.
What is dharma?
laws of existence.
how does one practice or what does it mean to practice the laws of existence?
Just by being AWARE that one is a part of of the whole environment that one is IN.
Wakeful living is all that is required to walk the path to be a buddha or one who is no more or being Thathaghat.
Love & rgds
Isn't this a mahayana belief? I don't think its right to say this because it seems different buddhist sects have different beliefs on this.
Why would it not be right? I'm a Theravadin myself and I see no problem.
Ultimately, the Buddha was still a man, and becoming more awake as he was is indeed the ultimate goal of any Buddhist.
Ultimately, the Buddha was still a man, and becoming more awake as he was is indeed the ultimate goal of any Buddhist.
Last edited:
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friends,
Kindly understand *buddha* is a state of being and not any individual person.
When an individual reaches to that *nirvanic* state; Gautama too became a buddha like Jesus became Christ i.e. the individual energy has fully merged with the universal energy and the individual is no more a separate entity is the state of *buddhahood*.
Religions are nothing but ways/path to reach such a state.
Love & rgds
Kindly understand *buddha* is a state of being and not any individual person.
When an individual reaches to that *nirvanic* state; Gautama too became a buddha like Jesus became Christ i.e. the individual energy has fully merged with the universal energy and the individual is no more a separate entity is the state of *buddhahood*.
Religions are nothing but ways/path to reach such a state.
Love & rgds
What I meant was that Theravadin's believe that ultimate goal is to become a buddha, pase-buddha or arhath.
Buddha - Understands the truth and shows the way to others.
Pase Buddha - Understands the truth but lacks the ability to teach others.
Arhath - Realities the truth through the teachings of a buddha.
So to become more awake, there are three ways according to theravadic concepts, or to the best of my knowledge.
It's just a problem with words. I think in theravada and mahayana has different meanings for the word "buddha". For theravada's Gautama was a buddha, but Sariyuth was not. Sariyuth was an Arhath. But I think Mahayanic buddhists use the word "Buddha" to talk about all enlightened.