I was wondering what the common conception of buddhism is on this forum, ive been studying buddhism for awhile and i can easily say i feel like ive only scratched the surface with a needle
in particular i mostly study Chan buddhism, its a sect of the mahayana school of buddhism, it was founded by bodhidarma in the shaolin temple through direct transmission from the buddha
umm, what the point of this whole thread is, is to maybe enlighten a few people about buddhism, some people are unaware of "what it is" EXACTLY, some feel its a philosophy others a religion others are unsure, from what ive gathered its both but then its not
according to what ive studied buddhism has branched out quite extensively over its history and its also been influencial of many different religious or philosophical practices, namely Daoism, christianity, shintoism etc
umm what i mean when i say that its both a religion and a or "just" a philosophical system is that, there are so many different sects and schools of buddhism that you cannot just point a finger and say "buddhism is this" or "buddhism is that" its not easily defined because different sects may not comply to the ideas or beliefs so to speak of others, but that also doesnt mean they are conflicted amongst each other
examples of philosophical buddhism would obviously be the sutras and such, but then you have people "worshipping" dietys and such, in reality ive never really heard of buddhist worshipping dietys moreso they rely on bodhisatvas and such for guidance and wisdom, or charity etc the common misconception of buddha being a god figure is one of western influence and misunderstanding(as far as i see it) the buddha wasnt a self proclaimed messiah, he just expounded the idea of "universal truth" which really all religions/philosophys stress when you get down to it
on that, the idea of divinity which i read I Brian said Buddhism is lacking is incorrect in my humble oppinion
just because a "godhead" isnt clearly defined doesnt mean the divine presence is lacking, infact when words like "nirvana, original face, universal truth etc etc" are used they are really expounding the same truth as a christian or muslim would when they reffer to "god" or yahavea(spelling?), joshua etc etc its the same for hinduism and the vedic perception that there is one god "the supreme godhead" or krishna conciousness, just because in hinduism there are found many different manifestations of krishna(god) it doesnt negate the fact that hindus believe and strive to merge back with god, to return to gods kingdom etc etc
to me the biggest problem isnt found in these particular systems, moreso they are found in that of the practitioners lack of ability to communicate and transmit the ideas to other cultures etc
anyway, i guess ill leave it at that, i really would like to hear others ideas on the subject
amitabha
in particular i mostly study Chan buddhism, its a sect of the mahayana school of buddhism, it was founded by bodhidarma in the shaolin temple through direct transmission from the buddha
umm, what the point of this whole thread is, is to maybe enlighten a few people about buddhism, some people are unaware of "what it is" EXACTLY, some feel its a philosophy others a religion others are unsure, from what ive gathered its both but then its not
umm what i mean when i say that its both a religion and a or "just" a philosophical system is that, there are so many different sects and schools of buddhism that you cannot just point a finger and say "buddhism is this" or "buddhism is that" its not easily defined because different sects may not comply to the ideas or beliefs so to speak of others, but that also doesnt mean they are conflicted amongst each other
examples of philosophical buddhism would obviously be the sutras and such, but then you have people "worshipping" dietys and such, in reality ive never really heard of buddhist worshipping dietys moreso they rely on bodhisatvas and such for guidance and wisdom, or charity etc the common misconception of buddha being a god figure is one of western influence and misunderstanding(as far as i see it) the buddha wasnt a self proclaimed messiah, he just expounded the idea of "universal truth" which really all religions/philosophys stress when you get down to it
on that, the idea of divinity which i read I Brian said Buddhism is lacking is incorrect in my humble oppinion
just because a "godhead" isnt clearly defined doesnt mean the divine presence is lacking, infact when words like "nirvana, original face, universal truth etc etc" are used they are really expounding the same truth as a christian or muslim would when they reffer to "god" or yahavea(spelling?), joshua etc etc its the same for hinduism and the vedic perception that there is one god "the supreme godhead" or krishna conciousness, just because in hinduism there are found many different manifestations of krishna(god) it doesnt negate the fact that hindus believe and strive to merge back with god, to return to gods kingdom etc etc
to me the biggest problem isnt found in these particular systems, moreso they are found in that of the practitioners lack of ability to communicate and transmit the ideas to other cultures etc
anyway, i guess ill leave it at that, i really would like to hear others ideas on the subject
amitabha