Does The Religious Aspects Of Buddhism Sometimes Get In The Way

[garro]

I have found myself moving away from the more religious aspects of Buddhism towards the more practical. I am interested almost purely now in how Buddhism can improve my daily life. I am drawn to techniques not teachings. I feel willing to throw away, or at least put to one side, all those things which require some sort of belief. I am less interested in seeing myself as a Buddhist and only use that term to acknowledge where much of my inspiration comes from. I sometimes feel that the religion 'Buddhism' can get in the way of what I think is the purpose of the whole enterprise - it can become just another religion. How do others feel? Do you think that sometimes the religion 'Buddhism' can get in the way of doing-Buddhism.

[jdinasia]

How can there be Buddhism without the triple gem? It seems as if your post suggests getting rid of all three! In which case are you not just describing meditation or something and not Buddhism?

[garro]

How can there be Buddhism without the triple gem? It seems as if your post suggests getting rid of all three! In which case are you not just describing meditation or something and not Buddhism?

Who said anything about getting rid of the triple gem? Unless of course you are suggesting that the religious aspects of Buddhism are the triple gem. I continue to take refuge in the Buddha as my tourist-guide through sangsara. I still get my inspiration from the teachings, and I respect those in the Sangha who bring the teachings to others. What I have less interest in doing is following rituals which may have little to do with the Buddha's original teachings. No offense, but who are you to say who is and isn't a Buddhist or what is or what isn't Buddhism. Not that it means that much to me if I'm considered a Buddhist or not.

[jdinasia]

I am drawn to techniques not teachings. I feel willing to throw away, or at least put to one side, all those things which require some sort of belief. I am less interested in seeing myself as a Buddhist and only use that term to acknowledge where much of my inspiration comes from. .

I am sorry but maybe I misunderstood the above .... doesn't acknowledging the Buddha and the teachings (the dharma) and the requirements of the Sangha including some rituals etc require 'some sort of belief'? and didn't you say that you are 'less interested in seeing yourself as a Buddhist'?

Your follow up post seems to change that some, but honestly it matters not at all to me how you or I identify ourselves to others. I personally think that Buddhism requires a significant amount of belief ... I just do not think it requires any faith.

[garro]

If you go to any country where Buddhism has taken hold for any long period it has become mixed with other religions and adapted to the people and culture. This is the same as all other religions as they move around the world. Inside these different adaptations is the essence of Buddhism -the good stuff.

I am less interested in these adaptations. I am not saying that they don't have value, but I just don't have the time to devote to them. Buddhism has been a very positive force in my life over the years when I have tried to put it into action.

I believe that the Buddha did not want blind followers who would take anything attributed to him as the truth. The truth is found by applying his teachings and if they work to adopt them. At least in my view. The kalma sutta seems quite clear to me;

"So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering"

So to me the term 'Buddhist' is not so important and discernment is needed when approaching the teachings attributed to the Buddha.

Of course you may completely disagree with my view and that is fine.

[Brucenkhamen]

I can't say I've ever been interested in the religious side of Buddhism.

However if I'm with a group, centre, or wat that is religion oriented then I just do what I need to do to fit in, just observe the arising and passing away of feelings in relation to it.

When in Thailand do as the Thais do, to the degree that it is skillful.

[camerata]

I have found myself moving away from the more religious aspects of Buddhism towards the more practical. I am interested almost purely now in how Buddhism can improve my daily life. I am drawn to techniques not teachings. I feel willing to throw away, or at least put to one side, all those things which require some sort of belief. I sometimes feel that the religion 'Buddhism' can get in the way of what I think is the purpose of the whole enterprise - it can become just another religion. How do others feel? Do you think that sometimes the religion 'Buddhism' can get in the way of doing-Buddhism.

Buddhism (the religion) already has got in the way of the original objective. I think it's crystal clear from the suttas that the Buddha was offering a solution for suffering in this life first, and in other lives second. If one takes the easy way - support the sangha and hope for a better next life - it isn't very effective in reducing immediate suffering. That's why people turn to charms and amulets.

I wouldn't say I am drawn only to techniques and not to teachings. A real understanding of the teachings results in an improved mind-set with less suffering. So, just hearing and understanding the Dhamma can be effective. Sometimes just hearing a teaching results in my coming up with my own technique.

Like Bruce, I don't have a problem with many of the cultural rituals since observing them is a way of fitting in and really does no harm.

[rockyysdt]

I have found myself moving away from the more religious aspects of Buddhism towards the more practical. I am interested almost purely now in how Buddhism can improve my daily life. I am drawn to techniques not teachings. I feel willing to throw away, or at least put to one side, all those things which require some sort of belief. I am less interested in seeing myself as a Buddhist and only use that term to acknowledge where much of my inspiration comes from. I sometimes feel that the religion 'Buddhism' can get in the way of what I think is the purpose of the whole enterprise - it can become just another religion. How do others feel? Do you think that sometimes the religion 'Buddhism' can get in the way of doing-Buddhism.

Hi Garro.

I view the religious organisational side of Buddhism as a vehicle to perform many community tasks such as funerals, marriages, charitable work and act as a focal point for inspiration, learning and practice.

I've met a number of Thais who generally understand Buddhas teachings but aren't committed enough to practice it, prefering others (monks) to do all the work. These people look for their merit through prayer, donations, amulets and superstitious customs.

The religious side gives comfort to those not serious enough to practice.

Those Buddhists who are serious about their practice will see through the religious aspect.

I met a young Thai tour guide who had spent six months as a monk but now works in the tourist industry.

I just couldn't understand how a person, who learned so much and practiced in a full time setting, could regularly smoke high tar cigarettes, prefering to choose the religious path.

[rockyysdt]

I have found myself moving away from the more religious aspects of Buddhism towards the more practical. I am interested almost purely now in how Buddhism can improve my daily life. I am drawn to techniques not teachings. I feel willing to throw away, or at least put to one side, all those things which require some sort of belief. I am less interested in seeing myself as a Buddhist and only use that term to acknowledge where much of my inspiration comes from. I sometimes feel that the religion 'Buddhism' can get in the way of what I think is the purpose of the whole enterprise - it can become just another religion. How do others feel? Do you think that sometimes the religion 'Buddhism' can get in the way of doing-Buddhism.

Hi Garro.

I view the religious organisational side of Buddhism as a vehicle to perform many community tasks such as funerals, marriages, charitable work and act as a focal point for inspiration, learning and practice.

I've met a number of Thais who generally understand Buddhas teachings but aren't committed enough to practice it, prefering others (monks) to do all the work. These people look for their merit through prayer, donations, amulets and superstitious customs.The religious side gives comfort to those not serious enough to practice.

Those Buddhists who are serious about their practice will see through the religious aspect.

I met a young Thai tour guide who had spent six months as a monk but now works in the tourist industry.

I just couldn't understand how a person, who learned so much and practiced in a full time setting, could end up regularly smoking high tar cigarettes, and obviously choosing the religious path.

Edited October 7, 2008 by rockyysdt

[mizzi39]

It is estimated that over 400 million people worldwide practice Buddhism as a religion. I hear many Thais (including my wife) refer to the Buddha as God. I don't see any harm in this. I have never experienced a Buddhist trying to shove their religion down my throat unlike some Christians that I have come across in life.

The Dalai Lama has stated that he has very little use for the ceremonies that surround Buddhism, but goes with the flow realizing that Buddhist ceremonies are very important to Tibetans, just like Buddhist ceremonies are important to Thais.

I am more interested in the Philosophy and Psychology of Buddhism which I personally feel is the core. The Practice of mindfulness is my goal.

[Yamantaka]

I have always understood Buddha's teachings to be more or less "Here's some things that I did that helped me get free of suffering. Try them, see which ones work for you."

Over the years, I have gone through a lot of practices which helped me progress spiritually, but when they became rituals in my mind, I stopped them. This is to me what differentiates Buddhism from religions in general: there are really no rules, only suggestions. I liken it to physical workouts. You use what works but try something else when you hit a plateau.

Each of us must find the path, tools and practices that suit our own psychology, lifestyle and attitude. But all who want to become Buddhas will do so, it is only a matter of how long it will take.

[Groongthep]

While I feel that the rituals and trappings of religion can play a useful social role in the cultures in which religions have existed for many years, but I don’t see them as particularly useful in helping one progress along a spiritual path. In fact, I believe if one begins to excessively cling to the identification of oneself as a Buddhist (or as a member of any other particular sect or religion) it may actually hinder ones progress. I also believe that how important the concept of “religiousness” is to someone is directly related to how developed that person’s insight into spirituality has become. Sort of like the old Buddhist parable about the raft that was used to cross the raging river. While we may highly value the raft as we are crossing the river, once we get to the other bank there is no need to burden ourselves with continuing to carry it with us for the rest of our journey.

About 10 years ago I attended a talk at Wat Umong in Chiang Mai with a Thai monk who had been ordained for about 15 years. He was about 35 years old at the time and appeared to me to be quite wise for his age. I already knew a fair amount about Buddhism mostly from reading translations of talks by Buddhadasa Bikkhu and from textbooks on Buddhism but at that time I did not practice meditation or identify myself as a Buddhist or a follower of any other religion. I asked him how he felt about all the rituals and functions required of him as a monk such as chanting at funerals and weddings, morning alms rounds and even the telling of fortunes. I was quite surprised when he answered me with complete honesty and told me that these activities were for the benefit of the average layperson who had not really studied the Buddha’s teaching in any depth but who needed theses trappings of ritual and ceremony to stay culturally connected with the community of fellow Thai Buddhists around him. He quickly admitted that he saw no real use in them personally but that it would be unkind and irresponsible of him and the other monks to deprive the people of these things that they placed such importance on. That monk, whose name I never got, influenced me to continue to study Buddhism (albeit spotty at times) to this day.

The late psychiatrist and author Dr. M. Scott Peck in his classic book on spirituality The Road Less Traveled theorized four stages of human spiritual development. Peck was educated at Harvard and Case Western Universities and worked as a practicing psychiatrist for many years before writing this book. He was also a follower of Zen Buddhism in his earlier years. Here are the stages he proposed:

Stage I being chaotic, disordered, and reckless. Very young children are in Stage I. They tend to defy and disobey, and are unwilling to accept a will greater than their own. Many criminals are people who have never grown out of Stage I.

Stage II is the stage at which a person has blind faith. Once children learn to obey their parents, they reach Stage II. Many so-called “religious” people are essentially Stage II people in the sense that they have blind faith in God or other religious dogma, and do not question the views of their religious teachers. They are humble and show an eagerness to obey and serve. The majority of average people who describe themselves as religious never move out of this stage. These are the people who more often tend to cling to ritual and ceremony. Most Christian and Islamic Fundamentalist also fall into this category, as do Buddhists who view the Buddha as God, wear amulets and pray to deities for divine help or assistance.

Stage III is the stage of cold scientific skepticism and reasoning. A Stage III person does not accept things on faith but only accepts them if convinced logically. Most people working in scientific and technological research are in Stage III. They are adept at thinking in abstract mathematical terms but are reluctant to translate the same abstract thinking into spiritual concepts.

Stage IV is the stage where an individual starts enjoying the mystery and beauty of nature. While retaining skepticism, he or she starts perceiving grand patterns in nature. Their spirituality differs significantly from that of Stage II people, in the sense that they do not accept things through blind faith but do so because of genuine belief. They are inquisitive and are seekers of truth wherever it may lie. They include Buddhists who have made significant progress on the path toward truth, understanding and enlightenment. Albert Einstein and Saint Thomas Aquinas were probably Stage IV people.

I know that putting people into neat little categories of spiritual development is probably a gross oversimplification and Peck suggested that the categories can overlap and people can digress backwards as well as move forward and can even jump back and forth during different periods in their life. The theory is by no means perfect but it is the only modern attempt I have seen to address the subject of spiritual progress objectively and it helped me to answer (in my own mind anyway) garro’s question of whether the religious aspects of Buddhism can get in the way of one’s practice. I believe it can, but only if we let it.

Edited October 29, 2008 by Groongthep

[fabianfred]

An adherance to rites and rituals is one of the hinderances to be got rid off before being able to progress to the first stage of Ariyahood, being Sotapanna...

I have always understood that a Religion is a set of theories or answers to the biggest, most important two questions in life...... Why we are here, and where do we go after...... different ideas and answers constitute different religions.

The Buddha did not start a religion, he taught the Dhamma. Dhamma meaning the rules of nature. Natural rules and laws which exist and affect all beings, whether they know about them or believe in them or not. Gravity is such a law, and affects all equally, not just christians or just asians, but all. rain falls equally upon all. The law of karma equally affects all, no matter if they choose not to believe in it or are ignorant of it.

On the night of his enlightenment the Buddha re-discovered the lost Dhamma, and after enjoying his new found knowledge for a while he set about to teach it, the truth to other beings. He said it would last for 5,000 years after his going, after which it would be lost again, until another Buddha was to rise and re-discover it. The Dhamma is too profound for any but a Buddha to discover by himself. We can understand it, after following his teachings,,,,but in the long periods between Buddhas there is noone who knows the existence of Nirvana or the path to reach it.