Objections against Buddhism

[sayak83]

I'm really not sure where this is going, or why...but it's certainly not something I want to argue, because I was initially explaining MY reason for personally not being a Buddhist.

While Buddhism has interacted with and coexists with local and regional folk religions, that's just fine. Christianity and Islam, as the other major 'world' religions, have also done so in many areas, but have also made a great effort to eradicate (or in some cases, incorporate) local/regional religions, and to force conversion, which I don't think Buddhism has done.

But my point is, when people start thinking of themselves as gods or demigods, and stop working with and listening to the ancestors and earth spirits, the result is going to be trouble--for everyone. In the West, that jump has been made through the Abrahamic faiths and the Enlightenment. I see at least the potential in Buddhism for rejecting the ancestors and spirits as illusion. It's a concern for me, but maybe if I had engaged MORE with Buddhism than I have, I might not be as concerned about it.

I guess one of the reasons it doesn't fit with me could be that the whole idea of the illusion, and the unity with the One, however it's conceived, is simply not something that I accept as real. Intellectually I understand it, but I do not experience it.

Yes, cool. I was simply sharing my thoughts as they came up while reading your posts. Not debating here.

 

[LuisDantas]

I do not think there is any animosity between spirits/ancestors and Buddhism. In fact Buddhist countries (Thailand, Sri-Lanka, Tibet etc.) are quite well known for their abundant belief and veneration of spirits and ancestors as well. Buddha and Buddhism explicitly acknowledges their existence and role in the order of the world.

I think a case can be made (and perhaps should be made) that while the animosity does not and should not exist, there is not a whole lot of true compatibility either, what with Anatta and all.

 

[sayak83]

I think a case can be made (and perhaps should be made) that while the animosity does not and should not exist, there is not a whole lot of true compatibility either, what with Anatta and all.

No, I think you are wrong in this. Buddhism explicitly acknowledges the presence, existence and capacities of spirits, ancestors and other beings of such nature. What it says that all such beings, where-ever they are in whatever form and having whatever power, remain subject to dukkha, to change and the flux of arising and passing away.
Buddhism itself does not require a world where they must necessarily exist. Hence Buddhism can, and does appeal to people who do not believe in their existence from the beginning. But, for the most part, Buddha and Buddhists did believe in the existence of such beings as much as they believed in the existence of other humans.

 

[Kirran]

I don't have any objections to Buddhism at all, really. I am not totally sure why it is that I ended up being in more the Hindu area than the Buddhist area. I think I have too much of the bhakta in me for Buddhism to be totally my jam. I have immense respect for many Buddhist traditions and teachers though.

R.e. the whole God thing, most of the takes on 'Can a Buddhist believe in God?' are in reference to the classical monotheist God widely spoken of in Abrahamic traditions. When you look at God in the sense of Brahman, or the Allah of the Sufis and so forth, then there's a lot more commonality, I think.

The Dalai Lama talks about God, uses that language around the right audiences.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Yes, cool. I was simply sharing my thoughts as they came up while reading your posts. Not debating here.

Don't remember if I also read anything about it, but a Buddhist I knew talked down about the Hinayana buddhists, largely because the kept the deities and spirits and ancestors, but his branch of Mahayana buddhism was so much better because it didn't. But I also know that Mahayana has mixed well with local and regional religions, become part of folk religion all across Asia. I think--maybe in part because he was a Westerner--he had a more intellectual (if still judgmental) approach.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I don't think you can, or even need to, "catch up." That's such a Western thing. You are where you are, you've done what you did, now you do what you can, even if it's just tapping your feet and swaying a little...

Haha. Is it really a western thing? You know we are always pressed for time and running out of time while making our bucket lists.

Where you from?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I tend to agree with you about the Pali Canon. For newcomers, I also suggest the anthology "In the Buddha's Words" after the Dhammapada, and then perhaps the full Pali Canon.
.

And dont read The Longer Discourses just yet (to new comers).

But they have a series of books. Good collection.

 

[sayak83]

Don't remember if I also read anything about it, but a Buddhist I knew talked down about the Hinayana buddhists, largely because the kept the deities and spirits and ancestors, but his branch of Mahayana buddhism was so much better because it didn't. But I also know that Mahayana has mixed well with local and regional religions, become part of folk religion all across Asia. I think--maybe in part because he was a Westerner--he had a more intellectual (if still judgmental) approach.

The Christian (and Islamic) animosity towards ancestor worship, animism, polytheism and spirit-worship is deeply embedded in Western culture and hard to get rid of. Of course, one may have metaphysical or empirical reasons for saying they do not exist, but that claim (from a secular materialist person's perspective) applies equally to God, gods, spirits, reincarnation and nirvana. But the typical approach...believing in spirits is "superstition" but believing in God or Buddha is "religion" ....is just monotheistic hangover.

 

[LuisDantas]

No, I think you are wrong in this. Buddhism explicitly acknowledges the presence, existence and capacities of spirits, ancestors and other beings of such nature.

Some forms seem to, mostly (far as I can tell) due to a degree of accomodation for Bon and Shinto beliefs.

Whether that should have happened and to which degree it is relevant for practice is a matter worth considering. I feel confident that Theravada, at least, does not have such accomodation and is IMO stronger for it.

None of that denies the plain fact that "folk" forms of Buddhism (and of most other religions really) often include some form of spirit practices. But that is, at the very least, unorthodox - for Buddhism no less than for, say, Catholicism.

What it says that all such beings, where-ever they are in whatever form and having whatever power, remain subject to dukkha, to change and the flux of arising and passing away.
Buddhism itself does not require a world where they must necessarily exist. Hence Buddhism can, and does appeal to people who do not believe in their existence from the beginning. But, for the most part, Buddha and Buddhists did believe in the existence of such beings as much as they believed in the existence of other humans.

I stand unconvinced, but I guess we will not convince each other.

 

[Kirran]

I haven't read it myself, but I get a good impression of Eknath Easwaran's translation of the Dhammapada as a text to read for a beginner.

 

[LuisDantas]

The Dalai Lama talks about God, uses that language around the right audiences.

To the best of my understanding, it is a bit of a distortion to even ask whether Buddhism "is" monotheistic, atheistic or politheistic.

Frankly, that is just not the focus of the doctrine either way.

 

[Kirran]

Whether that should have happened and to which degree it is relevant for practice is a matter worth considering. I feel confident that Theravada, at least, does not have such accomodation and is IMO stronger for it.

The Buddhists who come to worship at the temples at Skanda Vale are almost universally Theravadins, of Sri Lankan background. They're very happy to worship Murugan, Shiva, Vishnu, Jesus and Kali as well as the Buddha.

 

[Kirran]

To the best of my understanding, it is a bit of a distortion to even ask whether Buddhism "is" monotheistic, atheistic or politheistic.

Frankly, that is just not the focus of the doctrine either way.

As far as gods as distinct entities go, sure. But that wasn't what I was on about.

 

[LuisDantas]

The Buddhists who come to worship at the temples at Skanda Vale are almost universally Theravadins, of Sri Lankan background. They're very happy to worship Murugan, Shiva, Vishnu, Jesus and Kali as well as the Buddha.

I don't doubt that at all. I am very sympathetic to Shakti myself.

Whether that makes me a believer is another matter entirely.

 

[Kirran]

I don't doubt that at all. I am very sympathetic to Shakti myself.

Whether that makes me a believer is another matter entirely.

"Please don't believe, for heaven's sake do not believe!" - Guru Sri Subramanium

 

[LuisDantas]

"Please don't believe, for heaven's sake do not believe!" - Guru Sri Subramanium

A man after my own heart.

 

[Kirran]

A man after my own heart.

Follow Skanda Vale on Facebook, there's a bunch of his quotations and stuff on there.

 

[sayak83]

To the best of my understanding, it is a bit of a distortion to even ask whether Buddhism "is" monotheistic, atheistic or politheistic.

Frankly, that is just not the focus of the doctrine either way.

That is absolutely correct.

 

[buddhist]

The Buddhists who come to worship at the temples at Skanda Vale are almost universally Theravadins, of Sri Lankan background. They're very happy to worship Murugan, Shiva, Vishnu, Jesus and Kali as well as the Buddha.

An innumerable number of spirits, devas, deities, Brahmas, etc. are found throughout the scriptures of early Buddhism, so I'm not surprised by this.

 

[Kirran]

An innumerable number of spirits, devas, deities, Brahmas, etc. are found throughout the scriptures of early Buddhism, so I'm not surprised by this.

I don't know what's in the heads of all the day pilgrims. But among friends of mine who go regularly who are Sri Lankan Buddhists, the general understanding is the same as that of the Hindus, Christians and Sikhs who go there - Shiva, Lakshmi, Saraswati, Ganesha etc are forms taken by the one God, whose will moves the entire cosmos, and whose true nature has been apprehended by such realised souls as the Buddha. For the Buddhists, they pay a lot of reverence to the Buddha as a guru and an avatar, as the Christians generally do for Jesus and the Virgin.