Buddhists And Hinduism

[camerata]

Ask a Thai and they will indicate they are wholly Buddhist, despite the animism and Hinduism. I've even had more than one Thai tell me that the various Hindu deities are Buddhist gods.

Are these rural or uneducated Thais? In decades in Bangkok I've never heard anyone say anything like this. Of the educated urban Thais I've asked, all were well aware that the Erawan Shrine and the spirit house in the garden are not part of Buddhism, although they are of course part of Thai religious belief and national identity.

I happened to mention to my Bangkok doctor yesterday that I recently participated in a look nimit merit-making ceremony and she said, "But that isn't real Buddhism!"

[kropotkin]

In my opinion, all this shows the limits of religion.

At their origins, hundreds of years ago, religions were usefull inventions of scared, uneducated people.

They served a purpose.

But soon religions became institutionalised, with their leaders only interested in the power game.

And the followers soon developing the supermarket-attitude: take what you want, leave the rest on the shelves.

That explains the borrowing from other religions, such as christians incorporating pagan feasts, buddhists incorporating animism, etc.

I find it a challenge to believe in people..... but believing in gods??????

[camerata]

I find it a challenge to believe in people..... but believing in gods??????

OK, we get it - you're an atheist. But this is the Buddhist forum and we're here to discuss Buddhism.

[kropotkin]

I find it a challenge to believe in people..... but believing in gods??????

OK, we get it - you're an atheist. But this is the Buddhist forum and we're here to discuss Buddhism.

i tried to explain why - in my opinion - people who call themselves buddhist, also worship hindu gods.

[sabaijai]

Monotheism pretty much stamped out competing systems, but traditional Buddhism ignored them or assimilated them.

[sabaijai]

You will also find animist shrines in many Buddhist wats in Thailand. Thai Buddhism is an integrated belief system that includes elements of Pali Buddhism, Brahmanism (not Hinduism) and animism. It is not a 'pure' form of Buddhism, but then no Buddhist-majority country anywhere in the world can claim to follow a 'pure' form of Buddhism. Religions take on aspects of local culture wherever they take root. Tai communities in SE Asia were originally animist, and were later exposed to Brahmanism and then Buddhism. An integrated system is the result.

Brahmanist iconography found in Thai Buddhist painting, architectural ornamentation and sculpture is usually intended to demonstrate that the Brahmanist pantheon, in recognising that the Buddha had gone beyond their attainments, would serve to 'protect' Buddhism in the world. Most often the whole pantheon is represented by symbols associated with Indra, administrative leader of the Brahmanist pantheon ('king of the gods'), eg, an image of Indra or Garuda (Indra's mount) on the front gable of a temple building. People who work in civil service, the military, police and so on do in fact pay homage to these deities as it's believed they will help them with promotions and so on. For the same reason amulets, tattoos and so on will sometimes display Brahmanist iconography. Likewise animistic spirits play a role in daily life. Even morality, withdrawal and restraint perform talismanic roles in popular Thai Buddhism, something most Westerners don't understand.

Of course there are many Thais who are more interested in canonical Pali Buddhism, but they would seem to be in the minority.

To me, the significant point is that many Thais regularly incorporate Hinduism into their lives, and seem to have no idea that its principles conflict with their Buddhism.

Anthropologically the significant point is that it's an integrated system, within which there is no conflict, as practiced by most Thais. Conflict comes in one's interpretation.

[rockyysdt]

You will also find animist shrines in many Buddhist wats in Thailand. Thai Buddhism is an integrated belief system that includes elements of Pali Buddhism, Brahmanism (not Hinduism) and animism. It is not a 'pure' form of Buddhism, but then no Buddhist-majority country anywhere in the world can claim to follow a 'pure' form of Buddhism. Religions take on aspects of local culture wherever they take root. Tai communities in SE Asia were originally animist, and were later exposed to Brahmanism and then Buddhism. An integrated system is the result.

Brahmanist iconography found in Thai Buddhist painting, architectural ornamentation and sculpture is usually intended to demonstrate that the Brahmanist pantheon, in recognising that the Buddha had gone beyond their attainments, would serve to 'protect' Buddhism in the world. Most often the whole pantheon is represented by symbols associated with Indra, administrative leader of the Brahmanist pantheon ('king of the gods'), eg, an image of Indra or Garuda (Indra's mount) on the front gable of a temple building. People who work in civil service, the military, police and so on do in fact pay homage to these deities as it's believed they will help them with promotions and so on. For the same reason amulets, tattoos and so on will sometimes display Brahmanist iconography. Likewise animistic spirits play a role in daily life. Even morality, withdrawal and restraint perform talismanic roles in popular Thai Buddhism, something most Westerners don't understand.

Of course there are many Thais who are more interested in canonical Pali Buddhism, but they would seem to be in the minority.

To me, the significant point is that many Thais regularly incorporate Hinduism into their lives, and seem to have no idea that its principles conflict with their Buddhism.

Anthropologically the significant point is that it's an integrated system, within which there is no conflict, as practiced by most Thais. Conflict comes in one's interpretation.

Wouldn't the issue be the validity of such an integrated system rather than whether there is any conflict.

Wouldn't the introduction of non Buddhist religious aspects to Buddhism at the very least detract from ones goals or teaching?

Does following such system come down to truth vs contamination?

Edited December 22, 2010 by rockyysdt

[healthcaretaker]

You will also find animist shrines in many Buddhist wats in Thailand. Thai Buddhism is an integrated belief system that includes elements of Pali Buddhism, Brahmanism (not Hinduism) and animism. It is not a 'pure' form of Buddhism, but then no Buddhist-majority country anywhere in the world can claim to follow a 'pure' form of Buddhism. Religions take on aspects of local culture wherever they take root. Tai communities in SE Asia were originally animist, and were later exposed to Brahmanism and then Buddhism. An integrated system is the result.

Brahmanist iconography found in Thai Buddhist painting, architectural ornamentation and sculpture is usually intended to demonstrate that the Brahmanist pantheon, in recognising that the Buddha had gone beyond their attainments, would serve to 'protect' Buddhism in the world. Most often the whole pantheon is represented by symbols associated with Indra, administrative leader of the Brahmanist pantheon ('king of the gods'), eg, an image of Indra or Garuda (Indra's mount) on the front gable of a temple building. People who work in civil service, the military, police and so on do in fact pay homage to these deities as it's believed they will help them with promotions and so on. For the same reason amulets, tattoos and so on will sometimes display Brahmanist iconography. Likewise animistic spirits play a role in daily life. Even morality, withdrawal and restraint perform talismanic roles in popular Thai Buddhism, something most Westerners don't understand.

Of course there are many Thais who are more interested in canonical Pali Buddhism, but they would seem to be in the minority.

To me, the significant point is that many Thais regularly incorporate Hinduism into their lives, and seem to have no idea that its principles conflict with their Buddhism.

Anthropologically the significant point is that it's an integrated system, within which there is no conflict, as practiced by most Thais. Conflict comes in one's interpretation.

Wouldn't the issue be the validity of such an integrated system rather than whether there is any conflict.

Wouldn't the introduction of non Buddhist religious aspects to Buddhism at the very least detract from ones goals or teaching?

Does following such system come down to truth vs contamination?

I think there can be integrated, not all are conflicts.

Buddhism & Hinduism can integrate better.

Islam & Christianity can also integrate better since they are from the same school

[kropotkin]

I find it a challenge to believe in people..... but believing in gods??????

OK, we get it - you're an atheist. But this is the Buddhist forum and we're here to discuss Buddhism.

Do you think that an atheist can not be interested in buddhism? Or even be a buddhist?

Maybe an atheist can have valuable contributions on the subject of buddhist FILOSOPHY ?

Not on buddhist RELIGION of course.

[healthcaretaker]

Buddhism and Hindusim certainly don't conflict.

Some Buddhists monks having some Hindusim practice don't mean that they practice everything in Hinduism.

Anyone who claimed to be a Buddhist also need NOT practise Buddhism fully or even go to Buddhist temple.

I can claim myself to be a Buddhist as long as whatever i practise do not conflict with Buddhism.

Buddhism teachings NEVER said there are no gods or deities. In fact, I think Buddhism never conflict with any other religions, not even science.

How to conflict with other religions if it is not a religion and nothing superstitous or "impossible claims" or "unbelievanle claims" in it ?

More and more people is beginning to accept Buddhism as the right way of live, less a religion.

Not everyone needs a religion but everyone needs a life.

Edited December 22, 2010 by healthcaretaker

[camerata]

Do you think that an atheist can not be interested in buddhism? Or even be a buddhist?

Are you?

Maybe an atheist can have valuable contributions on the subject of buddhist FILOSOPHY ?

Great. If you have some, start up a topic and let's hear them.

[kropotkin]

Do you think that an atheist can not be interested in buddhism? Or even be a buddhist?

Are you?

Maybe an atheist can have valuable contributions on the subject of buddhist FILOSOPHY ?

Great. If you have some, start up a topic and let's hear them.

ok i understand you - i will leave this tread to the like minded.

[lungmi]

You will also find animist shrines in many Buddhist wats in Thailand. Thai Buddhism is an integrated belief system that includes elements of Pali Buddhism, Brahmanism (not Hinduism) and animism. It is not a 'pure' form of Buddhism, but then no Buddhist-majority country anywhere in the world can claim to follow a 'pure' form of Buddhism. Religions take on aspects of local culture wherever they take root. Tai communities in SE Asia were originally animist, and were later exposed to Brahmanism and then Buddhism. An integrated system is the result.

Brahmanist iconography found in Thai Buddhist painting, architectural ornamentation and sculpture is usually intended to demonstrate that the Brahmanist pantheon, in recognising that the Buddha had gone beyond their attainments, would serve to 'protect' Buddhism in the world. Most often the whole pantheon is represented by symbols associated with Indra, administrative leader of the Brahmanist pantheon ('king of the gods'), eg, an image of Indra or Garuda (Indra's mount) on the front gable of a temple building. People who work in civil service, the military, police and so on do in fact pay homage to these deities as it's believed they will help them with promotions and so on. For the same reason amulets, tattoos and so on will sometimes display Brahmanist iconography. Likewise animistic spirits play a role in daily life. Even morality, withdrawal and restraint perform talismanic roles in popular Thai Buddhism, something most Westerners don't understand.

Of course there are many Thais who are more interested in canonical Pali Buddhism, but they would seem to be in the minority.

Yes, they would be in a minority, like me. Knowing about the difference between Cultural and Authentic Buddhism (P.A.Payutto) I don't see it in a dualistic way. In my daily life I'm confronted with a lot of "superstitions" and I learnt to separate stupid ones (I reject) from meaningful ones by giving a moderate teaching: Oh, good Buddha (talisman) you have. How do you use it (him).-- I will have no accident with my car, I can drive "high speed".

--- No, the Buddhas give you awareness, mindfulness, that you can drive your car correctly, and then you don't have accidents. The Buddha protects you and your family and the car.

Some people understand, because I work in a Wat.

[phetaroi]

You will also find animist shrines in many Buddhist wats in Thailand. Thai Buddhism is an integrated belief system that includes elements of Pali Buddhism, Brahmanism (not Hinduism) and animism. It is not a 'pure' form of Buddhism, but then no Buddhist-majority country anywhere in the world can claim to follow a 'pure' form of Buddhism. Religions take on aspects of local culture wherever they take root. Tai communities in SE Asia were originally animist, and were later exposed to Brahmanism and then Buddhism. An integrated system is the result.

Brahmanist iconography found in Thai Buddhist painting, architectural ornamentation and sculpture is usually intended to demonstrate that the Brahmanist pantheon, in recognising that the Buddha had gone beyond their attainments, would serve to 'protect' Buddhism in the world. Most often the whole pantheon is represented by symbols associated with Indra, administrative leader of the Brahmanist pantheon ('king of the gods'), eg, an image of Indra or Garuda (Indra's mount) on the front gable of a temple building. People who work in civil service, the military, police and so on do in fact pay homage to these deities as it's believed they will help them with promotions and so on. For the same reason amulets, tattoos and so on will sometimes display Brahmanist iconography. Likewise animistic spirits play a role in daily life. Even morality, withdrawal and restraint perform talismanic roles in popular Thai Buddhism, something most Westerners don't understand.

Of course there are many Thais who are more interested in canonical Pali Buddhism, but they would seem to be in the minority.

You know, I think you've hit on something here that we have to understand more clearly, We tend to class Buddhism into the great classification of schools of Buddhist thought -- Theravada and Mahayana (for example). But maybe we're being too formal. Perhaps we need to recognize that in reality there are many schools of Buddhism -- perhaps "Thai Buddhism" is an offshoot. Perhaps there's a "Sabaijai" school of Buddhism with only one member. A "Vince" school of Buddhism. A "Camerata" school of Buddhism. And that a problem is that each school tries to think of itself as the "right school", rather than admitting that people can have differing views of Buddhism philosophy and that no one can prove many aspects of Buddhist thought. In fact, does not the phrase "Buddhist thought" imply that there it's not all "fact"?

[Xangsamhua]

In fact, does not the phrase "Buddhist thought" imply that there it's not all "fact"?

As I've already mentioned in other posts, I've been reading lately books by William Jakusho Kwong and Charlotte Joko Beck and following a sitting practice based on my understanding of what they say. They are American Zen masters and teach what is termed the "nothing special" mode of Zen.

It's noticeable that they refer very little and very seldom to the things like nirvana/nibbana, karma/kamma, or even dharma/dhamma. Their "thought" is not so much a series of deductions from the great principles of Buddhist philosophy, but simply reflection on one's day-to-day experience, the pitfalls of conceptualization and dualistic thinking, the importance of acknowledging where one is in relation to one's experience and context, of not judging this in relation to an externally imposed goal, and so on. Joko Beck refers at times to the importance of Buddha-nature - a notion dismissed, I think, by classical Buddhists, but one she uses fairly loosely, perhaps figuratively, as she uses stories and texts from the Bible to illustrate a point.

I guess this is an experiential and inductive approach, much as the Buddha's was in essence. He reflected on his own experience and what he saw around him and attained a state of enlightenment that he then, though reluctantly at first, decided to share with others. To do that, he had to use the language and imagery and conceptual knowledge of his time; hence the similarity with pre-existing Brahman forms. Well, the Thais have done the same thing, I guess. They have drawn on commonly understood tropes and images from pre-Buddhist times in Tai or proto-Siamese culture, and have grafted on the Khmer Hindu imagery that they got from Angkor and then in a Buddhic form from Khmer advisors to the Ayudhaya court, and it has all resulted in Thai (and Lao) Buddhism. Reforms following the reign of Rama IV attempted to assert a purer, more classical form of Buddhism in Thailand, but they are contested by those nostalgic for the days when monks and laypeople seemed to be closer to each other.

[sabaijai]

You will also find animist shrines in many Buddhist wats in Thailand. Thai Buddhism is an integrated belief system that includes elements of Pali Buddhism, Brahmanism (not Hinduism) and animism. It is not a 'pure' form of Buddhism, but then no Buddhist-majority country anywhere in the world can claim to follow a 'pure' form of Buddhism. Religions take on aspects of local culture wherever they take root. Tai communities in SE Asia were originally animist, and were later exposed to Brahmanism and then Buddhism. An integrated system is the result.

Brahmanist iconography found in Thai Buddhist painting, architectural ornamentation and sculpture is usually intended to demonstrate that the Brahmanist pantheon, in recognising that the Buddha had gone beyond their attainments, would serve to 'protect' Buddhism in the world. Most often the whole pantheon is represented by symbols associated with Indra, administrative leader of the Brahmanist pantheon ('king of the gods'), eg, an image of Indra or Garuda (Indra's mount) on the front gable of a temple building. People who work in civil service, the military, police and so on do in fact pay homage to these deities as it's believed they will help them with promotions and so on. For the same reason amulets, tattoos and so on will sometimes display Brahmanist iconography. Likewise animistic spirits play a role in daily life. Even morality, withdrawal and restraint perform talismanic roles in popular Thai Buddhism, something most Westerners don't understand.

Of course there are many Thais who are more interested in canonical Pali Buddhism, but they would seem to be in the minority.

You know, I think you've hit on something here that we have to understand more clearly, We tend to class Buddhism into the great classification of schools of Buddhist thought -- Theravada and Mahayana (for example). But maybe we're being too formal. Perhaps we need to recognize that in reality there are many schools of Buddhism -- perhaps "Thai Buddhism" is an offshoot. Perhaps there's a "Sabaijai" school of Buddhism with only one member. A "Vince" school of Buddhism. A "Camerata" school of Buddhism. And that a problem is that each school tries to think of itself as the "right school", rather than admitting that people can have differing views of Buddhism philosophy and that no one can prove many aspects of Buddhist thought. In fact, does not the phrase "Buddhist thought" imply that there it's not all "fact"?

Absolutely. And I think you're right, even the sectarian breakdowns can be further broken down into idiosyncratic views.

[camerata]

And that a problem is that each school tries to think of itself as the "right school", rather than admitting that people can have differing views of Buddhism philosophy and that no one can prove many aspects of Buddhist thought.

I don't see the majority of members here assuming they have it "right" and others have it wrong. It's just that we all tend to focus on what works for us personally and try to pass that experience on to others - and then the different approaches tend to get highlighted since it's a discussion forum. It is a pity, though, that a common theme in many topics is that the Thai Buddhists have got it wrong. They just have a different focus to the typical Western convert.

[bankei]

Why do some buddhists worship hindu gods?

I've often asked the same question. When I first came to Thailand 20 years ago I expected to find monks following the vinaya and practicing pure authentic Buddhism.

Firstly, there is no such thing as 'pure' Buddhism. What could pure Buddhism be? Is is only that which is written in the Pali Canon? Would chanting or Buddha statues be classifiable as Buddhist practices if they are not mentioned in the scriptures?

This creates problems as the canon is vast with different types of Buddhism justifiable by different suttas or different interpretations. What about the various commentarial interpretations too? Worshiping gods could possibly be justified by reference to the Pali scriptures.

Then you have to consider that Pali Buddhism is only one version of the early Buddhisms - and is it really that early?

What is Hinduism? This is a western invention that is applied to a number of Indian religions. Many 'Hindus' will tell you that Buddhism is a part of Hinduism. Many Brahmanical gods such as Brahma (พรหม) appear in the Pali scriptures constantly - though I don't think Ganesh appears. Does that make Brahma a Buddhist diety?

Then you have to look at history. Brahmanical religions were very common in Thailand and Khmer regions for hundreds of years so you could say the religion is ingrained in Thai society.

People will also follow what they think works for them If the worshipping of gods didn't produce results (or appear to) then the worship would have stopped years ago.

Bankei