Namaste rdwillia,
thank you for the post.
rdwillia said:
No, you're absolutely right, Vajradhara. Hence my reluctance of putting him on my shrine. My tradition doesn't actually recognize the jolly Buddha as a real Buddha, and the commercialization has turned the Buddha into a Santa Claus of sorts.
i would tend to agree with you. my own shrine has the Buddha Shakyamuni and the Bodhisattvas Manjurshri and Avelokiteshavara, arrayed underneath Buddha Shakayamuni.
we have a "display" sort of thing in the living room where i display Ho Tei and a host of other Bodhisattvas and so forth.
i completely agree with your view regarding the commercialization of Buddhas and all of that sort of thing. in a very real sense, it seems like something vital is stripped out and a hollow husk presented to the consuming public.
All too often the term "Buddha" is thrown around a little too loosely, thereby causing us to forget about how truly rare Buddhahood really is... or so we think. Unless of course I'm the only one who's not enlightened.
actually, you are correct about this as well, at least from this world systems point of view
all things being equal, there are few beings which are Buddhas and many, many beings which are Awakened. there is a difference between Enlightenment and being a Buddha, mostly to do with being able to accurately teach the Dharma, in my traditions view.
Don't some schools teach that Buddhas permeate all of space, though?
yes, this is the view, generally, of the Mahayana and Vajrayana Vehicles. there is some slight discussion of this in the Hinyana Vehicle, however, that isn't something which gets all that much emphasis.
generally speaking, this is part and parcel of what are called the Three Kayas, the Nirmanakaya, the Sambhogakaya and the Dharmakaya. briefly,
the Dharmakaya is something that is always present; it is rediscovered rather than created anew. Because it is atemporal and ahistorical, we cannot attribute change or transformation to it. Because it is passive and indeterminate in nature, Dharmakaya cannot manifest as a medium for one to work for the benefit of others, but it does give rise to the deterministic aspects of Sambhogakaya and Nirmanakaya.
Like the Dharmakaya, the Sambhogakaya is always present. It has to do with mental powers, with the ability of one's mind to manifest in relation to the five wisdoms. The Sambhogakaya is connected with communication, both on the verbal and nonverbal levels, and it is also associated with the idea of relating, so that speech here means not just the capacity to use words but the ability to communicate on all levels. Both the Sambhogakaya and Dharmakaya aspects are already embodied within each sentient being, and fruition is a matter of coming to that realization.
Nirmanakaya is the physical aspect of an enlightened being, the medium through which communication and relating can be carried out. It can be said to be new or different, because it is only on the physical level that one can become transformed. In Tibetan the purified body, called ku, is the manifestation of the fully transformed body free from the influence of deeply set and inculcated karmic residues.
the interested reader is directed to this site for more details:
http://www.kagyu.org/buddhism/cul/cul02.html
My conclusion was to keep the smiling monk to remind me not to get too serious, as I have a tendency to forget that sometimes. He's more of an offering to the real Buddhas. But as far as actually considering him a traditional Buddha, obviously that wouldn't be accurate.
agree. i have noted a tendency in my own mindstream which seems to take itself quite seriously at times and attaches a great deal of importance to this seriousness. seeing Ho Tei smiling back at seriousness usually breaks the tension and the seriousness flows into joyousness.
I have also heard that it is a Thai (Buddhist) belief that he is a future incarnation of Buddha Maitreya. That in the future all Buddhas will be fat and happy. True? I have no idea.
it sort of depends on which school that a Thai Buddhist is practicing, more than anything else. the large belly is a symbol representing charity and compassion for others, so in this sense, yes, all the Buddhas which will arise in this world system will have fat bellies
of course, i wouldn't usually use the term "happy" since that is part and parcel of Samsara. i would, however, conceed that it is a fine word to use, should no other be available. typically, i would use the term "blissful" if i had to
of course, these are my own views predicated on my understanding, such that it is
metta,
~v