|
|
|
General
Buddhism |
Namo Dharmaya !
Hail to the Teachings
Frequently Asked Questions
Note: words in italics can be found in the Glossary.
PAGE CONTENTS
What is a Buddha?
Buddhism a different type of Hinduism?
Buddhism: philosophy, religion or psychology?
God in Buddhism?
What about creation?
Heaven and hell?
Christianity and Buddhism?
Why shave your hair, be celibate and put on robes?
Why Silence?
Do Buddhists eat meat?
Social engagement in Buddhism?
Women in Buddhism?
Buddhist marriage?
Buddhism and sex
Tantra and sex?
If we are all reborn, how can the world population increase?
Free Tibet, what is the problem?
Where and when to find a guru?
Is emptiness the same as nothing?
Cyberspace, blessings and Kalachakra?
Is Buddhist tantra derived from Shivaism?
Who is Enlightened in the World Today?
A Buddha is a person who has developed all positive qualities and has eliminated all negative qualities. A Buddha has been an "ordinary" living being, like you and me before he became enlightened or awakened. Enlightenment is compared to waking up, as a person suddenly makes a complete transformation in body and especially mind. A Buddha is omniscient or all-knowing. One could say that a Buddha represents the very peak of evolution. A Buddha is not omnipotent or all-powerful; otherwise the Buddha would have ended all suffering in the universe.
The historical Buddha, Shakyamuni or Gautama Buddha, lived about 2,500 years ago in India. However, he was not the first Buddha, and will not be the last either. The next Buddha will be called Maitreya. See more details on the Buddha page.
BUDDHISM A DIFFERENT TYPE OF HINDUISM?
Few scholars would disagree that at the time of the Buddha, a very heterogeneous
and actively developing religious culture flourished in India. This generally
accepted historical reality proves that Buddhism was neither a protest against,
or an offshoot of Hinduism (this view is even expressed for example in the Ecyclopedia
Brittanica). Buddhism simply proved to be one of the more successful new schools
of thought within a large variety of philosophies.
As debate is a very old traditional means of testing (spiritual) teachers in
Indian culture, of course one can trace many philosophical works (especially
in the Mahayana tradition), that could be interpreted as protesting against,
or arguing with other traditions. Western philosophers may have misinterpreted
these works as "protest", as such a thing is unthinkable within Western
religious systems. The Buddha himself actually refused to argue on spiritual
matters, he explained that he only presented what he had realized as the truth.
On the other hand, Buddhism arose from an existing culture, and inevitably many
elements of other contemporary traditions are found in Buddhism. In the same
sense one could argue that Christianity would be an offshoot of (or protest
to) Judaism and Islam is an offshoot of (or protest to) Christianity...
It appears that Buddhism draws most of its inspiration from the religious culture of the Indus Valley civilization; like the elements of renunciation, meditation, rebirth, karma, and liberation. Also, many symbols of the Indus Valley civilization have religious significance and are also sacred to Buddhism. They include the pipal tree (later known as the bodhi tree, or ficus religiosa), and animals such as the elephant and deer. On the other hand, aspects similar to the Aryan tradition can be clearly traced, especially in the rituals of tantric Buddhism. This in contrast to Hinduism, where many of the Aryan principles dominate, but also contains various elements of the Indus Valley Culture. For more details, see the page on pre-Buddhist history.
BUDDHISM: PHILOSOPHY, RELIGION OR PSYCHOLOGY?
Strictly spoken, the word religion is defined in Merriam Webster's Collegiate
Dictionary as:
"1: the service and worship of God or the supernatural
2: commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
3: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
4 archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
5: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith"
Within above definitions, Buddhism can be called a religion. Often however, "service and worship of God" is mentioned, and Buddhism does not include belief in a God.
Buddhism can be called a philosophy in a practical sense of the word. However, the Buddha repeatedly emphasized that his teachings were not intended as a doctrine, but should be guidelines along the path of spiritual development.
One could even call Buddhism a system of psychology as well. The main object of interest in Buddhism is how we can change our own mind. Therefore, the mind and its functions take up a very central place in the teachings and practices of Buddhism.
We first need to distinguish two types of "god".
The first type is God as creator of the universe etc. This kind of God does
not exist in Buddhism.
The second type is a divine or supernatural being, and of these one could simply
say there are two kinds of gods in Buddhism.
Not all living beings live on earth, or would even be visible to us. One could
say that these creatures live in different dimensions from us. See also Heaven
and Hell below. Some of these creatures experience by their nature (karma) experience
almost exclusively happiness, and these are called Devas (Skt.) or gods.
If one defines a god as a supernatural being, one could say that a Buddha
or an Arya being are "supernatural" in the sense that they are not
bound to the same realms of cyclic existence as we are, and they are said to
possess supernatural powers.
A Buddha is said to be omniscient (all-knowing), but not omnipotent (all-powerful). The logical reasoning behind this last is that if a Buddha would be omnipotent, He/She would remove suffering from the universe.
So where does the world come from, if not from a creator-God? According to
Buddhism, the cycle of life, death and rebirth does not have a beginning. The
universe itself goes through cycles of birth and destruction.
The closest phenomena that comes to creation is the concept of karma:
whatever we experience - be it happiness or suffering - is ultimately caused
by ourselves in the past. This leads to the simple conclusion that nothing what
we experience is ultimately caused by someone or something else; only we ourselves
have created the causes for what happens to us now, and we are now creating
the causes for what will happen in the future. The "others" who appear
to cause us happiness and suffering are simply circumstances which enable our
own potentials to ripen. In that sense, we are the creators of our "own
universe".
It may come as a surprise, but heavens and hells exist in Buddhism, although
they are different from the Christian descriptions. One could say that heaven
and hell are different realms (dimensions), where beings live under respectively
extremely happy and extremely suffering conditions. It is a logical consequence
of the laws of karma. When one creates vast amounts of negative actions to others,
one will harvest lots of suffering in the future - such a life could be in one
of the hell realms. Similarly, many good actions can cause one to be reborn
in a heavenly realm of happiness.
Life in heaven and hell, like all other realms (human, animal and preta) is
a temporary situation, as they are are within the realm of cyclic existence.
This means that a life in hell is not eternal (although it may feel like it),
and neither is heaven.
The final aim of a Buddhist should be to become free from death
and rebirth, which is called Nirvana (Skt.) or Nibbana (Pali). A
life in heaven is regarded a pleasant interval, but always with the fear of
a future rebirth in a much less pleasant realm.
Thich Nhat Hanh puts it this way:
So Buddhism and Christianity by definition are different religions, and one should be careful when trying to "mix" them. For example, Buddhism does not believe in a "creator-God" who controls the world and similarly, Christianity does not believe in karma or rebirth. If one tries to mix the two into one personal religion, it is easy to get confused, as both philosophies do not really match."We don't want to say that Buddhism is a kind of Christianity and Christianity is a kind of Buddhism. A mango can not be an orange. I cannot accept the fact that a mango is an orange. They are two different things. Vive la difference. But when you look deeply into the mango and into the orange, you see that although they are different they are both fruits."
Some related interesting articles on the web:
from "Jesus and
Buddha: The Parallel Sayings" edited by Marcus Borg
from "Going Home:
Jesus and Buddha as Brothers" by Thich Nhat Hanh
From "Silent
Mind, Holy Mind" by Lama Yeshe
WHY SHAVE YOUR HAIR, BE CELIBATE AND PUT ON ROBES?
In other words, why becoming a monk or nun? Well, it is not to make your life
easy and comfortable, but it is intended to stay focused on spiritual progress.
Traditionally, one will live in a monastery or nunnery after ordination, and
one is surrounded by others trying to do the same, which can help your own practice
and understanding quite dramatically.
For many Westerners it proves quite a difficult step: there may be a language
and cultural barriers to the tradition you have chosen. Also, walking around
in robes in the West can prove quite a challenge.
Why shave your hair? It is a good antidote to pride and focus on one's outer
appearance.
Why be celibate? Nothing wrong with sex - where else do people come from - but
focus on sex and relationships does prove to be a major distraction to most
of us.
Why put on robes? The robes are intended like a kind of uniform, by which people
can easily recognize that you are a monk or nun.
For more on ordination, see the page on Sangha.
There are several reasons why Buddhists tend to be fond of silence.
- One refrains from lying or misleading others by speech.
- One becomes more aware of the inner state of mind.
- It is easier to control one's mind when not talking.
- It's nice and quiet (sorry, just joking).
It is quite common that one remains silent during a retreat. In many practices,
a vow of silence is advised so as to focus one's full attention to the state
of mind.
From my own experience, if one keeps silent one somehow builds up a lot of extra
awareness and clarity of mind during a retreat. As soon as you start talking,
quite a bit of focus can be lost in just minutes.
Simple question, not necessarily a simple answer.
1. The Buddha himself never forbade eating meat.
The Buddha even explained that monks and nuns should never refuse the food that
is offered to them, including meat. He obviously did not say one should kill
an animal for food. Killing is one of the five main precepts.
2. The main precept of a Buddhist is not to harm others, including animals.
Not harming others is essential in Buddhism, so one should never kill "sentient
beings" (humans and animals). Eating meat from an animal which died a natural
death is not by definition bad, but these days, we would not even want to eat
that meat anyway for fear of disease...
3. Asking people to harm others is very negative karma.
Just like a general is responsible for the killing that his soldiers perform
under his orders, so do we create very large negative karma when we instruct
others to kill. So, for example going into a fish restaurant and selecting a
live fish from a tank to be killed is even more negative karma than killing
the yourself, as we are not just responsible for the death of the fish, but
also create negative karma by asking someone else to kill.
4. Different traditions vary in their reasoning.
For example, the high altitude of Tibet causes that not many crops will grow,
and in order to survive, people had to eat meat. Currently, Tibetans are enthusiastic
meat eaters even if they live in India. Therefore His Holiness the Dalai Lama
now encourages them to eat less meat and eggs.
In the Chinese tradition, when people take the Bodhisattva
precepts, it is automatically assumed that one will abstain from meat eating.
5. Conclusion
Killing of an animal is certainly not allowed. Meat eating is not explicitly
forbidden, but ill-advised unless really necessary for survival. I must admit
not being a vegetarian; I do have lots of weaknesses. What I did is to at least
reduce my meat intake drastically and try to realize how hypocrite I am by still
eating meat.
Most of the Buddhist practice focuses on one's own inner development. Engagement
with others is mainly seen important in if one can help others. The best way
of helping others is to help them on their path of spiritual progress. The second
best way is helping them in daily life. However, if others do not improve their
behavior and way of thinking, helping people in difficult situations is like
a hopeless uphill struggle. Without changing, people will continue to create
causes for future suffering (karma) for themselves, and we cannot avoid all
their suffering.
Therefore, building a hospital is a very good thing as it can reduce suffering,
but only spiritual progress can bring an end to cyclic existence and all suffering
of an individual.
So the overall attitude is: it is best to help others in their spiritual progress,
if that is not possible or appropriate try and help them with their current
problems.
A hot topic. I am afraid that Buddhism also comes from, and lives in, a patriarchal society. It is my personal opinion as a man, that an attitude is prevalent of "all humans are equal, but women are a bit less equal than men". The reason I say this is that the Buddha clearly stated that all living beings (let alone humans) are equal but not the same. Women can just as well become liberated from cyclic existence (Arhat) or fully enlightened (Buddha). However, the Buddha himself was initially reluctant to ordain women, and with several ordination rules they can be said to be discriminated against. All of the main disciples of the Buddha were men, and so are almost all Buddhist saints and well-known teachers throughout history.
The current situation of Buddhist nuns in the world is quite sad.
For example in Sri Lanka no nuns are ordained anymore as the lineage was lost
and never restored, and in almost every tradition, nuns and nunneries are considered
less important than monks and monasteries, sometimes to the point of neglect.
In Tibet, the lineage for novice nuns is still intact, but the lineage for fully
ordained nuns was lost and not restored. His Holiness the Dalai Lama is actively
supporting the quest to re-establish the full nuns ordination.
Good pages on the web on women in Buddhism are the Sakyadhita page and women active in Buddhism.
Sorry, no. Originally, marriage is just a contract between people, more for
legal than any other reasons. Interestingly enough, having sex with an already
married person is clearly considered a major sexual offense in Buddhism.
When Buddhists marry, they often request a teacher to bless them or perform
prayers. For some more info and ideas, see the Khandro
website under Buddhist wedding.
The search for a partner and sex tend to take up much of our energy. Our inborn
urge for sex and a lasting relationship is very strong and can in that way be
regarded as one of the major obstructions to a focus on spiritual progress.
Sexual misconduct is one of the five main precepts which one can take when becoming
a Buddhist. The definition of what is misconduct and what is not is partly
dependent on the culture where you live, but in general, non-harm to others
is probably the best guideline.
In tantric Buddhism, there is much ado about sex, but often misunderstood. See
the next query below.
Part of the exercises in tantric practice involve controlling and transforming bodily energies. Sexual energy happens to be one of the strongest forms of physical energy; simply said, it is built-in by nature to ensure the survival of our species. Also these sexual energies need to be completely controlled and transformed in order to become a fully enlightened Buddha. What is usually overlooked is that sexual practices in tantra should be free from the ordinary desires and lust, and generally only very advanced practitioners should try these practices after permission from their teachers. Simply said, it has very little to do with ordinary sex. Arousal of the sexual energy is preferably done by just visualising a consort.
The union of male and female are symbolic for the union of method or compassion and wisdom, or more specific, the union of bliss and emptiness. See also Keith Dowman's website for a more elaborate explanation.
IF WE ARE ALL REBORN, HOW CAN THE WORLD POPULATION INCREASE?
According to Buddhism, unless we achieve Arhantship or Buddhahood, we will be reborn, but not necessarily in the same world, or as human being. A simplified example: if we behave "like an animal", we create all the potential to be reborn as an animal. So we will not automatically be human next life. In the same way, an animal can come back as human next life. Apart from the earth, life is wide-spread in the universe, according to some, one could even speak of more simultaneous universes. Although the vast number of sentient beings is just about constant, the numbers within a specific species can vary from zero to zillions.
FREE TIBET, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?
Until the invasion of China into Tibet in 1959, Tibet has been a sovereign
country for centuries. Being forcefully overrun by an other country is rarely
pleasant, but for the Tibetans it turned into a real disaster in the years following
the takeover. People died during the invasion, although few Tibetans (being
Buddhist) fought. Later consequences of Mao's policies proved devastating to
the country.
For example, the central Beijing government ordered that certain crops should
be grown in Tibet. Many of these crops were simply not suitable for the high
altitude climate, resulting in many Tibetans starving to death.
Possibly the best known disaster is the fact that in Tibet nearly all culture,
philosophy and education was tightly related to Buddhism. As in Mao's China
religion was considered a poison to the people, Tibetan Buddhism was almost
literally wiped out. Of the estimated 6,000 monasteries, nunneries and temples
only a handful were not fully destroyed. Monks and nuns were forced to break
their vows and often killed if they were not prepared to break them. With the
destruction of Buddhism, nearly all of Tibets' cultural identity also vanished.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama is probably the best known propagator to a peaceful
solution for the preservation of Tibetan culture and religion, but the Chinese
authorities have managed not only to ignore his efforts, but to virtually bully
the rest of the world into silence on the subject. (Often along the lines of:
"If you want to trade with us, shut up on human rights." This method
even bullied the Americans into submission.)
For more info see the page of the Tibetan Government in Exile and the Free Tibet page.
This is not an easy to answer in general, as every individual is different.
Especially, being unfamiliar with Eastern culture, many Westerners are confused
with the issue of a guru or spiritual teacher. See also the page on A
Teacher.
It is often said that when a disciple is ready, the teacher will appear. If
you cannot find a teacher, see if you fulfil the above requirements for a proper
disciple, and work to improve your own attitude. Depending on your own karma,
you may need to do quite a lot to find the right guru. Perhaps you are impatient
and expect too much overnight, then doing self-study and questioning yourself
what you really expect from a teacher may help.
IS EMPTINESS THE SAME AS NOTHING?
Certainly not!
Buddhist philosophy presents a middle way between the two extremes of Nihilism
and Materialism/eternity.
The statement "everything is empty" is often (mis-) used, leading
to the impression that Buddhists are nihilists, as if they think that nothing
exists at all. What is actually meant with the statement is "everything
is empty of inherent existence"; in other words, everything does not exist
in accordance with our "normal" perception of reality.
Our "normal" perception of reality is that phenomena are existing
in and of themselves, often unrelated to each other; which is considered by
Buddhism as a materialistic/worldly viewpoint not in accordance with reality.
The realization of insight into the true nature of reality is the way in which
we can escape suffering, and forms the basis of Buddhist philosophy.
If these words are confusing but fascinating, great! Please refer to the Wisdom
page and put some effort in understanding the concepts, as this realization
can end all your problems in one blow.
CYBERSPACE, BLESSINGS AND KALACHAKRA?
(From: http://www.lightlink.com/namgyal/blessing.html)
"We turned to the monks of Namgyal Monastery, the personal monastery of
the Dalai Lama, to discuss whether the blessing of cyberspace would be possible.
They enthusiastically responded, noting that one tantric system in particular,
the Kalachakra Tantra, believed to have been first taught by the Buddha, would
be highly appropriate as a blessing vehicle because it especially emphasizes
space, itself (along with consciousness), as one of the six constituent elements
of the universe, in addition to the more familiar elements of earth, air, fire
and water.
Coincidentally, the Kalachakra is also the most widely disseminated of the Tibetan
Buddhist tantric systems, often being offered to over 100,000 people at a time
when it is presented by the Dalai Lama in South Asia.
In the monks' view, cyberspace resembles space in general, which Tibetan Buddhists
characterize more as the absence of obstructions than as a distance between
two points. Also, cyberspace, like ordinary space, can be defined as something
that cannot in and of itself be seen or measured, yet which can be conceptualized
and used. That is, it has no inherent existence for its own part, yet it exists
as a field for mental activity. Where there is an absence of obstructions, there
is the potential for something to arise, the nature of which depends on the
motivation of those who use it.
In blessing cyberspace, the monks reasoned, they could offer prayers that the
motivation of Internet users become more positive and that the benefits of using
the Internet become more positive."
IS BUDDHIST TANTRA DERIVED FROM SHIVAISM?
It is often claimed that Buddhist tantra is a derivate from the
tantric practices in Shivaism, but in fact, the reverse may be true.
As Benoytosh Bhattacharyya notes in his 'Buddist Esoterism':
"it is possible to declare, without fear of contradition, that the Buddhists were the first to introduce the tantras into their religion, and that the Hindus borrowed them from the Buddhists in later times, and that it is idle to say that later Buddhism is an outcome of Saivaism. .. The literature, which goes by the name of the Hindu Tantras, arose almost immediately after the Buddhist ideas had established themselves."
Although there are striking external resemblances, the differences in methods and aims between the Buddhist and Hindu tantras are quite significant.
WHO IS ENLIGHTENED IN THE WORLD TODAY?
The following answer is taken from http://www.accesstoinsight.org/faq.html:
Since I'm not enlightened, I'm not sure how valuable any of the following remarks are, but I offer them here nonetheless. First of all, I wouldn't be a Buddhist if I didn't think enlightenment were possible. In the suttas, the Buddha speaks again and again of the many rewards awaiting those who follow the Path, long before they reach nibbana: the happiness that comes from developing generosity; the happiness that comes from living according to principles of virtue; the happiness that comes from developing loving-kindess (metta); the happiness that comes from practicing meditation and discovering the exquisite bliss of a quiet mind; the happiness that comes from abandoning painful states of mind; and so on. These can be tasted for yourself, to varying degrees, with practice. Once you've personally verified a few of the Buddha's teachings, it becomes easier to accept the possibility that the rest of his teachings are plausible -- including his extraordinary claim that enlightenment is real.
I honestly don't know how to recognize an enlightened person. After all, how can I see past my own delusion and defilements with enough clarity to judge the purity of another person's heart, that most secret corner of the psyche? I don't believe an enlightened person looks, walks, or talks a certain way. The Hollywood stereotype - a radiant complexion, an ever-present Buddha-smile, wise words (perhaps cloaked in cryptic koan-like phrases and mystical jargon, sprinkled with the occasional impish giggle), unusual clothing (probably imported from India), a charismatic character - I sincerely doubt that any of this has anything whatsoever to do with enlightenment. So it's probably best not to spend much time speculating on someone else's degree of enlightenment.
Your time would be far better spent looking into your own heart, asking yourself,
"Am I enlightened? Have I made an end of suffering and stress?" If the answer
is negative, then you have more work to do. When deciding whether to accept
someone as your meditation teacher, instead of speculating on his or her degree
of enlightenment, it's much more fruitful to ask yourself, "Does this person
seem to be truly happy? Does he or she live in line with the precepts? Does
he or she communicate the Dhamma in ways that I can understand? Is his or her
interpretation of Dhamma a valid one?"
It may take a long time of close association with someone before you can begin
to answer these questions with any confidence. But once you do find someone
possessing this rare constellation of qualities, stay with him or her: he or
she probably has something of genuine value to teach you.
Finally, one rule of thumb that I've found helpful: someone who goes around claiming to be enlightened probably isn't - at least not in the sense the Buddha had in mind.
Previous
Page | ^Top of Page | Next
Page - Four Noble Truths
Last updated: March 14, 2001
