sunny.spoone
December 26th, 2007, 11:11 AM
I consider myself, above all things, Buddhist. I've been on this merciful path for nearly five years and am quite comfortable here. I've never gotten on well with formal religion and ritual. I was raised atheist with God being a mythical man who caused the rain and the thunder.
I've heard many arguments that Buddhism is not a religion, rather a philosophy. I've heard arguments that Buddhism is religion on 'the next level', if you will. It's an interesting conundrum considering Buddhism is an athiestic religion/philosophy with dieties. There is no god in canon text, but through tradition and non-canon texts we have a pantheon of gods--multiple pantheons of gods if you divide it up by sect.
I do not follow a set tradition of Buddhism. I cannot even bring myself to definitively say I'm part of the Mahayana or Therevada (or Vajrayana depending on where you draw the line). I've been told this is bad. I've been told this is good. I think my resistance to forcing myself into one of these labels comes from my belief that I should not usurp another's culture. Many of the different forms of Buddhism are deeply ingrained in the culture of their region. I follow the teachings of Buddha; I am not one to declare one cultural interpretation superior to another. I decide for myself what seems like a truthful and thoughtful part of my religion, not matter the point of origin.
Take, for instance, the Dalai Lama. I love the Dalai Lama. I think he is an incredibly noble man who has more peace and compassion in his heart (as he ought to considering he is the Boddhisattva of Compassion) than anyone else. I am not Tibetan though, and Tibetan Buddhism is very different from the original teachings of Siddharta. I admire the Dalai Lama, hold him in great respect, but I'm not going to try and align myself with a culture I cannot even begin to understand. Perhaps its the anthropologist in me that takes such offense to the idea.
I meditate when I feel the need. I try to live up to the Eightfold Path as best as I can. Beyond this, it has always been in flux, a sense of intuition towards and kinship with Buddhism.
I also draw from the Tao Te Ching, even though it is a Taoist document. I view secular Taoism and Buddhism to be two sides of the same coin. Buddhism is the way of the individual, the Tao being the way of the world. They fit together so well that I often cannot tell the difference between them. To say the least, Taoism has had an incredible effect in how I view the world around me.
I'm specifically talking about the ability to believe in paradoxes. Buddhism has a few paradoxes as well (such as God without God). Many think I am stupid for believing in such strange things as a godless world filled with gods, in predestiny with complete and implicit free-will, a completely scientific reality full of magick. I don't consider myself stupid, I consider my way of thinking expanded. It is impossible to explain such things to others and I think that frightens them.
The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.I don't think I could put it better, myself.
I've heard many arguments that Buddhism is not a religion, rather a philosophy. I've heard arguments that Buddhism is religion on 'the next level', if you will. It's an interesting conundrum considering Buddhism is an athiestic religion/philosophy with dieties. There is no god in canon text, but through tradition and non-canon texts we have a pantheon of gods--multiple pantheons of gods if you divide it up by sect.
I do not follow a set tradition of Buddhism. I cannot even bring myself to definitively say I'm part of the Mahayana or Therevada (or Vajrayana depending on where you draw the line). I've been told this is bad. I've been told this is good. I think my resistance to forcing myself into one of these labels comes from my belief that I should not usurp another's culture. Many of the different forms of Buddhism are deeply ingrained in the culture of their region. I follow the teachings of Buddha; I am not one to declare one cultural interpretation superior to another. I decide for myself what seems like a truthful and thoughtful part of my religion, not matter the point of origin.
Take, for instance, the Dalai Lama. I love the Dalai Lama. I think he is an incredibly noble man who has more peace and compassion in his heart (as he ought to considering he is the Boddhisattva of Compassion) than anyone else. I am not Tibetan though, and Tibetan Buddhism is very different from the original teachings of Siddharta. I admire the Dalai Lama, hold him in great respect, but I'm not going to try and align myself with a culture I cannot even begin to understand. Perhaps its the anthropologist in me that takes such offense to the idea.
I meditate when I feel the need. I try to live up to the Eightfold Path as best as I can. Beyond this, it has always been in flux, a sense of intuition towards and kinship with Buddhism.
I also draw from the Tao Te Ching, even though it is a Taoist document. I view secular Taoism and Buddhism to be two sides of the same coin. Buddhism is the way of the individual, the Tao being the way of the world. They fit together so well that I often cannot tell the difference between them. To say the least, Taoism has had an incredible effect in how I view the world around me.
I'm specifically talking about the ability to believe in paradoxes. Buddhism has a few paradoxes as well (such as God without God). Many think I am stupid for believing in such strange things as a godless world filled with gods, in predestiny with complete and implicit free-will, a completely scientific reality full of magick. I don't consider myself stupid, I consider my way of thinking expanded. It is impossible to explain such things to others and I think that frightens them.
The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.I don't think I could put it better, myself.