“The fact is that some Buddhists live their daily life as polytheistic statue worshippers and view Buddhas and Bodhisattvas as deities. ”

True. And why not? Why shouldn’t people do just that? Who is to say that hours of intense meditation is any better than the faith of a simple person praying to their Buddha?

I’m sure that worshipping the Buddhas is just as sure a route to “generating empathy and bodhicitta” as any other.

Thank you Dave.

Good post.

Dave,

That’s one hell of a long comment!

Let us recall, though, that Buddhism is not a single thing, not any single true teaching or practice. It is a movement based on the experience(s) of Siddhartha Gautama and the attempts of each generation inspired by Siddhartha to follow his example. Was his a singular experience or did it represent a class of experience or set of experiences, and what aspect of his life should we emulate if we think we can recreate what he experienced? Or are such expectation precisely the kind of trap he was advising us to avoid? Such movements inevitably become institutionalized to some degree for a variety of reasons, some worthwhile, others not. This isn’t a bad thing, but the question still remains – what of the Buddha’s experience should be remembered and honored and what is “just” baggage? The fact is that some Buddhists live their daily life as polytheistic statue worshippers and view Buddhas and Bodhisattvas as deities. Their sutras may suggest otherwise, their stated formal beliefs and the lessons taught by their monks and priests may say otherwise, but in everyday terms that is how they function, even if they don’t recognize it or acknowledge it directly.

This is the same as many people who, while officially stating their monotheistic beliefs and creeds from their Abrahamic religions, live in their secular societies as “practical atheists”. That is, while they may profess to believe one thing, their daily actions and attitudes suggest something else. And in the Christian tradition in particular, one also struggles with the question of which of Jesus’ experiences and insights should be emulated and which are just a load of Samsonite. For example, Fr. Thomas Keating has suggested that the success or failure of each generation of Christians can be measured by how well they incorporate the contemplative dimension of the Gospels, that is, seeing the Ultimate Reality as immanent as well as transcendent, or knowing God as “Abba”.

So, if the point of a religion is ONLY to reproduce certain rituals, beliefs, liturgies, documents, etc, then we can judge a religion on how well it is staying true to these things and making them important enough to each generation to recreate them and pass them on to the next generation. If the point of a religion is to help people to overcome their false, limited selves and become open to their greater nature, then we can judge a religion on how many people it assists in undergoing this spiritual transformation. Yet in order to help people with this transformation, having shared sacred symbols, spaces, and practices is essential (some may think this is true only at the beginning of the journey, but while the nature of the usefulness of such things change, they still fulfill many roles – it attachment to such symbols as an externality of what we are seeking that makes them an impediment). So then the tension is over whether the representatives of a religion are using such shared sacred imagery to assist in the spiritual transformation of those who come into contact with the religion or whether they are trying to recreate such imagery for its own sake.

This latter view can be understood in terms of judging whether someone is or isn’t a “true Buddhist” based on how that person dresses or talks, or the person does not follow a script of expectations for how the transformation should take place or it should “look like”. The same can be said of a “true Muslim”, or a “true Christian”, etc. Adherence to the right image takes precedence over inner transformation. Another way to say it is this – is Buddhism about producing “Buddhists”, or is it about liberation from the suffering caused by our delusions. Is Christianity about producing “Christians”, or is it about salvation from the confusion and pain of our estrangement from God (the Divine, Ultimate Reality, etc). As many have pointed out before, the Buddha wasn’t a Buddhist and Christ wasn’t a Christian, so when we consider what it means to be a member of a religious tradition, we should be asking, “What’s the point?” “What is this tradition trying to show me?”

Gerald Ford wrote: This is pretty disheartening to someone like me whose really trying to follow the path as best I can. The last thing someone needs to be reminded is that everyone around you follows a totally different religion and looks down on yours as something primitive or heathenish…

Of course, when you really think about it deep down, what other people think of me and my beliefs doesn’t really matter

Why? Why are you, or I, or anyone else following this or that “path”? On the one hand, it is true that we must risk the disapproval of others to be true to our goals, but what are those goals? Is it strictly an offshoot of Western individualism – a kind of do-it-yourself-improvement hobby? Is it about finding a way to truly live which embraces all sentient beings? Something else? And if it, whatever it is, is a worthy goal, then in a way it does matter what others thing of us. That is, are we living in a way that demonstrates we really honor what we claim to follow and that we are sincere in our vision? As a student of Jon Kabat-Zinn reportedly once said, “When I was a Buddhist, it drove my parents and friends crazy, but when I am a Buddha, nobody is upset at all.” This isn’t the same as conforming by truncating or abdicating our values or objectives. It is about examining what really matters and when we should take a stand or make a correction and when we should not.

As for the reminder of what other people think, we can benefit from recognizing the pervasiveness of ignorance and suffering in the world, and in recalling our own failing, practice generating empathy and bodhicitta. Of course, I personally often have immense trouble doing this myself… ;o)

Gerald Ford wrote: It’s also disheartening to see a lot of people who grow up Buddhist leaving the religion because they don’t understand it. For them it’s ossified into dry rituals and worship, and its the fault of priests and parents who don’t educate their kids about the meaning of it all. However, I bet the parents likewise don’t get it either, and just follow along because their parents did too.

This may or may not be true, but it’s not always the fault of the priest or the parent. The same tradition isn’t always right for everyone at every time. Some people leave their birth religion and then “rediscover” it later in life. This gets back to what I was saying above about the goals of each religion (or each branch or congregation).

Gerald Ford wrote: Recently, while having a conversation with a Buddhist priest I know online, he told me that in the end Buddhism has to be practiced alone. We came into this world alone, and we’ll die alone.

This is somewhat true but also absolutely wrong.

Marcus: No worries at all. I am actually happy to see so much discussion lately. Beats Buddhist forums any day.

Erg: We also need to talk about that mess you left behind the couch….

Wishing all Peace and Happiness,

Marcus