Should A Religion/philosophy Evolve Over Time?

[phetaroi]

I'm going to begin by leaving this topic fairly broad, and just say that:

Buddha's words were spoken 2,500 years ago.

Christ's 2010 years ago.

Muhammad's 1,500 (?) years ago.

Should we expect a religion or philosophy to remain totally static for those amounts of time?

If not, who is to say what aspects of the evolution are appropriate or not appropriate?

[camerata]

Let's keep this on the topic of Buddhism alone, whether it is a religion or a philosophy. Christianity and Islam are based on what is claimed to be the word of God, so there is a strong argument that humans cannot simply come up with something better than God's word.

With Buddhism, it's a bit different. The Buddha actually told his monks they could change the "small" rules of the Vinaya after he was gone. But he also taught the Dhamma, and the Dhamma is unconditioned.

What intrigues me is to what extent the Dhamma will apply to us when we have evolved into species that are no longer human, through genetic manipulation or through combinations of machinery and human tissue.

[Samuian]

YES!

But as in the specific case of Dhamma, Dharma, camerata already wrote: The Dhamma is universal "Law of Nature" and "looks after itself" through Karma, it doesn't need reviewing!

There is simply nothing to modify, rewrite, rethink, or to be audited!

With Buddhism as a practiced Religion I have the notion that there could be a revaluation as in all the other Religions practiced!

But then the follower can do this himself, for himself, anytime!

[Xangsamhua]

But despite what the Buddha is quoted as saying in the Pali Canon, the religion that was founded on his life and teachings has evolved.

One may well maintain that the Pali Canon is the rock upon which the Dhamma is built and all other sutras, teachings, traditions and schools are deviations from the scriptural path; however, what the world knows as Buddhism and what many of its practitioners believe to be dhamma has evolved from its original base.

Is Mahayana merely a distortion, a heresy, or is it in its manifold forms a development? Does it add value to the earlier forms of Buddhist teaching and practice? Is the answer a matter of opinion or a sociological finding?

Much of the world, both East and West, knows the Buddha's teaching through the Great Vehicle (Mahayana). One may feel sad that this is not a pure form, but can we say that it is not an evolved form of Buddhism? Is it recessive, burdened too much with the weight of national myths that it has taken on board? I don't see it that way, but perhaps that is because I think it's a universal cultural given that stories, whether factual or mythic, become embellished with time.

The alternative is the archaic and dessicated legalism of some Islamic and Judaic schools. Dhammayut Buddhism in Thailand has been a force in that direction, hasn't it, with its emphasis on study of Pali and the Pali texts, its inflexibility in discipline and its contempt for popular and regional forms of spirituality and practice (despite the influence of Dhammayut forest monks up to the late 50s)?

[rockyysdt]

The Buddha actually told his monks they could change the "small" rules of the Vinaya after he was gone.

I'd be interested in some examples of small rules having been changed?

[rockyysdt]

Is Mahayana merely a distortion, a heresy, or is it in its manifold forms a development? Does it add value to the earlier forms of Buddhist teaching and practice?

Could the answer relate to, "can one become enlightened following the Mahayana path?"

If both Theravada & Mahayana teachings lead to enlightenment & nirvana does that make both teachings equally OK &/or acceptable?

[PeaceBlondie]

Judaism HAD the longest history of practical pacifism in history. It is now violent again. Christianity started out as pacifist for over 300 years, and has been 99% violent for the last 1,600 years.

If these religions based on scripture can change that drastically, Buddhism can change.

[camerata]

The Buddha actually told his monks they could change the "small" rules of the Vinaya after he was gone.

I'd be interested in some examples of small rules having been changed?

None of them were. The 1st Council couldn't decide on this. Eventually Mahayana went in a different direction.

[camerata]

Is Mahayana merely a distortion, a heresy, or is it in its manifold forms a development? Does it add value to the earlier forms of Buddhist teaching and practice? Is the answer a matter of opinion or a sociological finding?

I see Buddhism as results-based and subjective. Either you get some results (i.e. reduction of stress/suffering) in this life or you might as well try something else. For the average layman, I'm sure some good results are possible in this life with some Mahayana teachings.

[Xangsamhua]

I see Buddhism as results-based and subjective. Either you get some results (i.e. reduction of stress/suffering) in this life or you might as well try something else. For the average layman, I'm sure some good results are possible in this life with some Mahayana teachings.

Camerata, in saying that "the average layman" can get some good results from some Mahayana teachings, are you implying that these teachings are unproductive for monastics or people who would like to be more advanced in knowledge and practice of Dhamma? Or that advanced Mahayana practitioners and teachers would be even more advanced if they followed the Theravada path exclusively?

It seems to me that there are some very advanced Mahayana monastics and lay teachers who draw abundantly on Mahayana texts and schools of thought. But perhaps they are advanced in esoteric and occult teachings and practices rather than "Buddhism". They think they're Buddhists though.

[camerata]

I see Buddhism as results-based and subjective. Either you get some results (i.e. reduction of stress/suffering) in this life or you might as well try something else. For the average layman, I'm sure some good results are possible in this life with some Mahayana teachings.

Camerata, in saying that "the average layman" can get some good results from some Mahayana teachings, are you implying that these teachings are unproductive for monastics or people who would like to be more advanced in knowledge and practice of Dhamma? Or that advanced Mahayana practitioners and teachers would be even more advanced if they followed the Theravada path exclusively?

I'm saying that for those who aren't trying to attain nibbana or the other levels of enlightenment (the average layman as opposed to a dedicated monk-ascetic) in this life, either Theravada or Mahayana can reduce dukkha.

However, it isn't the same situation for a serious practitioner. By definition, a priest or anyone else following the Mahayana "bodhisattva path" never attains nibbana, as described in the Pali Canon. They just hope that in a gazillion aeons all beings will have been saved and they can attain eternal Buddhahood, which is misleadingly referred to as "final nirvana" or "perfect nirvana." Nibbana is attainable in this life, Buddhahood is not.

[Xangsamhua]

Thank you. Nice and clear.

[fabianfred]

The Dhamma is unchanging because it is the truth...the real Ultimate Truth (of which there can only be one)....natural laws which apply equally to all beings...whatever religion the profess ..... whether they believe in the Dhamma or not..understand it or not.

But whilst beings are still stuck in Samsara they are subject to impermanence....so are the teachings about the Dhamma.

This present Buddha's Dhamma teachings are predicted to last for five thousand years after his passing to parinirvana. So they are getting gradually altered and corrupted and misunderstood and misinterpreted...and when the end is near one will have to climb a mountain to find the last guy in a cave who knows the true dhamma since all that will be left are teachings of the false dhamma.

Then there follows a long period of darkness, ignorance of the truth, until the next buddha comes and rediscovers the lost dhamma and teaches it again.

[phetaroi]

The Dhamma is unchanging because it is the truth...the real Ultimate Truth (of which there can only be one)....natural laws which apply equally to all beings...whatever religion the profess ..... whether they believe in the Dhamma or not..understand it or not.

But whilst beings are still stuck in Samsara they are subject to impermanence....so are the teachings about the Dhamma.

This present Buddha's Dhamma teachings are predicted to last for five thousand years after his passing to parinirvana. So they are getting gradually altered and corrupted and misunderstood and misinterpreted...and when the end is near one will have to climb a mountain to find the last guy in a cave who knows the true dhamma since all that will be left are teachings of the false dhamma.

Then there follows a long period of darkness, ignorance of the truth, until the next buddha comes and rediscovers the lost dhamma and teaches it again.

This smacks of religious faith, not a provable truth.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Christianity and Islam are based on what is claimed to be the word of God, so there is a strong argument that humans cannot simply come up with something better than God's word.

The problem is what 'is' the Word of God in these religions? they can't even agree on that and fight wars over it! at least in Buddhism we don't always agree but (thank God/Buddha) we don't fight over it... well only with words sometimes

[canuckamuck]

Judaism HAD the longest history of practical pacifism in history. It is now violent again. Christianity started out as pacifist for over 300 years, and has been 99% violent for the last 1,600 years.

If these religions based on scripture can change that drastically, Buddhism can change.

Ummm 99% violent?

where the heck was your church? Afghanistan?

Sorry for the thread hijack

[PeaceBlondie]

Judaism HAD the longest history of practical pacifism in history. It is now violent again. Christianity started out as pacifist for over 300 years, and has been 99% violent for the last 1,600 years.

If these religions based on scripture can change that drastically, Buddhism can change.

Ummm 99% violent?

where the heck was your church? Afghanistan?

Sorry for the thread hijack

Are you saying the Church is 100 percent violent? A CPT Quaker who was kidnapped by Muslims was murdered in Iraq. 45 Catholic absolute pacifists were murdered by their Evangelical neighbors on 12/22/1997. We go to conflict zones as unarmed peacemakers.

[canuckamuck]

Judaism HAD the longest history of practical pacifism in history. It is now violent again. Christianity started out as pacifist for over 300 years, and has been 99% violent for the last 1,600 years.

If these religions based on scripture can change that drastically, Buddhism can change.

Ummm 99% violent?

where the heck was your church? Afghanistan?

Sorry for the thread hijack

Are you saying the Church is 100 percent violent? A CPT Quaker who was kidnapped by Muslims was murdered in Iraq. 45 Catholic absolute pacifists were murdered by their Evangelical neighbors on 12/22/1997. We go to conflict zones as unarmed peacemakers.

Jeepers, my church in the west runs a food bank and is filled with skateboarding youth on Friday nights. Maybe they are the one percent

Edited March 12, 2010 by canuckamuck

[PeaceBlondie]

Maybe it's 95 percent violent. Texas is 99% enemy haters. And most Jews aren't pacifists now. Burma, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand hate enemies. AFAIK, Buddhism already has abandoned its roots.

[canuckamuck]

Ok I think we should return this to the original topic. There is no place on TV for discussions of mainline religions unless Buddhists are doing the talking, as we all know.

[ChiangMaiFun]

Maybe it's 95 percent violent. Texas is 99% enemy haters. And most Jews aren't pacifists now. Burma, Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand hate enemies. AFAIK, Buddhism already has abandoned its roots.

Then they are not Buddhists... don't confuse anything to do with living in those counteries with being Buddhist - I have rarely met real Buddhists amongst the populace.

[rockyysdt]

The Dhamma is unchanging because it is the truth...the real Ultimate Truth (of which there can only be one)....natural laws which apply equally to all beings...whatever religion the profess ..... whether they believe in the Dhamma or not..understand it or not.

But whilst beings are still stuck in Samsara they are subject to impermanence....so are the teachings about the Dhamma.

This present Buddha's Dhamma teachings are predicted to last for five thousand years after his passing to parinirvana. So they are getting gradually altered and corrupted and misunderstood and misinterpreted...and when the end is near one will have to climb a mountain to find the last guy in a cave who knows the true dhamma since all that will be left are teachings of the false dhamma.

Then there follows a long period of darkness, ignorance of the truth, until the next buddha comes and rediscovers the lost dhamma and teaches it again.

Just to better understand Dhamma teachings.

Is Mahayana a false Dhamma path?

[fabianfred]

Just to better understand Dhamma teachings.

Is Mahayana a false Dhamma path?

Nothing I could quote from scriptures.... but according to my teacher when Hinduism was making a resurgence in India and Buddhism was struggling to keep followers they (Mahayana) decided to place a different stress on the Boddhisatvas.

All religions which worship a god or gods causes the people to pray for help of an outside influence, but Buddhism teaches that only we can help ourselves, by our own efforts....not appealing to the lazy.

The fact that a Boddhisatva (a Buddha in training) during his long time perfecting himself, is driven by compassion, and has a basic understanding of the workings of karma, tries to help other beings.

The mahayana tried to make their interpretation of boddhisatvas appeal to people by saying that they are driven by compassion and can help beings, so people would be able to pray to them and ask for help.

This was just before Buddhism was wiped from India by the Mongol invasion, and escaped into tibet etc.

[fabianfred]

The Dhamma is unchanging because it is the truth...the real Ultimate Truth (of which there can only be one)....natural laws which apply equally to all beings...whatever religion the profess ..... whether they believe in the Dhamma or not..understand it or not.

But whilst beings are still stuck in Samsara they are subject to impermanence....so are the teachings about the Dhamma.

This present Buddha's Dhamma teachings are predicted to last for five thousand years after his passing to parinirvana. So they are getting gradually altered and corrupted and misunderstood and misinterpreted...and when the end is near one will have to climb a mountain to find the last guy in a cave who knows the true dhamma since all that will be left are teachings of the false dhamma.

Then there follows a long period of darkness, ignorance of the truth, until the next buddha comes and rediscovers the lost dhamma and teaches it again.

This smacks of religious faith, not a provable truth.

very little in matters spiritual is provable....... apart from to ourselves. If I see my past lives during meditation then my belief in rebirth would probably become unshakable...it would change from belief to certain knowledge, but I couldn't show these proofs to anyone else...

paccatam veditabo vinyuhiti ..... to be know only by ourselves

and you will always get the lazy ones who sit back and will not do the practice for themselves but taunt you with..."well I don't believe you...you prove it to me..."

if they are too lazy to get up and practice then they are condemning themselves to being stuck in Samsara for a very long time....

[phetaroi]

The Dhamma is unchanging because it is the truth...the real Ultimate Truth (of which there can only be one)....natural laws which apply equally to all beings...whatever religion the profess ..... whether they believe in the Dhamma or not..understand it or not.

But whilst beings are still stuck in Samsara they are subject to impermanence....so are the teachings about the Dhamma.

This present Buddha's Dhamma teachings are predicted to last for five thousand years after his passing to parinirvana. So they are getting gradually altered and corrupted and misunderstood and misinterpreted...and when the end is near one will have to climb a mountain to find the last guy in a cave who knows the true dhamma since all that will be left are teachings of the false dhamma.

Then there follows a long period of darkness, ignorance of the truth, until the next buddha comes and rediscovers the lost dhamma and teaches it again.

This smacks of religious faith, not a provable truth.

very little in matters spiritual is provable....... apart from to ourselves. If I see my past lives during meditation then my belief in rebirth would probably become unshakable...it would change from belief to certain knowledge, but I couldn't show these proofs to anyone else...

paccatam veditabo vinyuhiti ..... to be know only by ourselves

and you will always get the lazy ones who sit back and will not do the practice for themselves but taunt you with..."well I don't believe you...you prove it to me..."

if they are too lazy to get up and practice then they are condemning themselves to being stuck in Samsara for a very long time....

1. "The Dhamma is unchanging because it is the truth...the real Ultimate Truth (of which there can only be one)". And of course, Fred, of all the people in the world, you have that ultimate truth. This is exactly why so many people have so many problems with religions. One person knows that his truth is better than someone else's truth.

2. "This present Buddha's Dhamma teachings are predicted to last for five thousand years after his passing to parinirvana. So they are getting gradually altered and corrupted and misunderstood and misinterpreted...and when the end is near one will have to climb a mountain to find the last guy in a cave who knows the true dhamma since all that will be left are teachings of the false dhamma. Then there follows a long period of darkness, ignorance of the truth, until the next buddha comes and rediscovers the lost dhamma and teaches it again." All of this is your faith talking. There's nothing wrong with faith. There's nothing wrong with having faith. The problem is when you see your personal faith as a universal truth.

3. "you will always get the lazy ones...." I'm not sure that's a very convincing argument for your case. Having a different point of view than yours, does not make someone lazy.

4. "but taunt you with..."well I don't believe you...you prove it to me..."" Once again, in my view, you're mixing faith into the equation.

One of the things that attracts me to Buddhism is that it requires an open mind that continues to refines what one learns. There are few things I personally have decided are universal truths. One thing that I do believe is that there is no one alive of whom I'm aware that knows the answers to what we are discussing. I assume that most of us in this forum believe in nirvanna (for example). And while many here may have convinced themselves that nirvanna is a "truth", no one here has proven -- even to himself -- that it is a "truth". Or, am I wrong? Has someone here actually achieved nirvanna?

[fabianfred]

As we know... the Buddhas teaching of the Dhamma is not about mere belief or even having an intellectual understanding of it....but about practice....the main practice being keeping the precepts and meditation and/or mindfulness.

By practice our belief or understanding becomes changed into knowledge.....certain knowledge...or our beliefs are proven to us..... but we cannot show these proofs to another, only show them how we arrived at this...guide them upon the correct path...but they have to do the walking....the practice.

If someone has arrived at a point where, for him, the truth is evident and unquestionable, it will sound to others that he is being over-confident or even boastful of knowing the truth. That is why such a person would quietly carry on his own practice until a student came to him and asked to learn, rather than try to teach a large audience...amongst which there would be many whose egos cause them to rebel at the thought of somebody claiming to know things which they do not.

Our egos are good at that.....causing us to feel uncomfortable and not want to accept that we don't know everything...

[fabianfred]

....and since both of my main teachers are considered to be Arahants I have complete confidence in their teachings....

[ChiangMaiFun]

....and since both of my main teachers are considered to be Arahants I have complete confidence in their teachings....

very dangerous presumption... 'are considered to be...' there are many people 'considered to be...' Osho is 'considered to be' God by many... and on and on etc. know one truly knows and in this respect I actually agree with the OP (for once)

[phetaroi]

By practice our belief or understanding becomes changed into knowledge.....certain knowledge...or our beliefs are proven to us.....

Do you have any concept of how many born-again-Christians say exactly the same thing?

[phetaroi]

....and since both of my main teachers are considered to be Arahants I have complete confidence in their teachings....

very dangerous presumption... 'are considered to be...' there are many people 'considered to be...' Osho is 'considered to be' God by many... and on and on etc. know one truly knows and in this respect I actually agree with the OP (for once)

LOL...yes, I am shocked...you and I agree on something!

And let me give our friend Fred another example:

"The sheer psychic power of 30,000 people meditating together can make miracles happen, say the monks here at the headquarters of Thailand's biggest, richest and -- to the established priesthood -- most dangerous new Buddhist sect...The movement calls itself Dhammakaya...Its leaders intend it to become the central landmark of world Buddhism, a sort of Vatican or Mecca for their faith, whether the established hierarchy likes it or not. Already the movement claims to have more than 100,000 followers who gather in temples around Thailand and 10 foreign countries, including the United States...All of this has thrown Thai Buddhism into an uproar. The sect's leader, Phra Dhammachayo, 55, has been accused of fraud and embezzlement as well as religious heresy. Newspapers are filled with demands that he be tried or defrocked or both. The top body of Thai Buddhism, the Sangha, has demanded the abbot's removal and has summoned him for questioning -- all of which he has ignored, only deepening the public's sense that the traditional religious structure has become weak and irrelevant."

http://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/Fac/.../Dhammakaya.htm

All of those followers have "complete confidence" in those teachings, too.