Buddhism 101

• King
• Boatsman
  • Maitreya
• Shepherd
  • Avalokiteshvara
  • Manjughosa / Manjushri
  • Shantideva

So wait, will everyone eventually reach enlightment? Also, are new souls ever created or is every living thing/being/entity a reincarnation of a past living thing/being/entity?

Abstain from alcohol? Well I can safely add Buddhism to the list of religions I'm going to Hell/Hell equivalent in.

Marky: You won't go to Buddhism hell for drinking alcohol, silly! :P You just possibly won't reach enlightment in this life!

edited 24th Sep '11 10:17:37 PM by Zersk

Yes everyone will eventually reach Enlightenment. But apparently souls keep being born or some shit and even when the universe dies it will just be reborn so...Samsara will just keep going and going.

Zersk: nonsense, I reach enlightenment after 8 Jagerbombs.

Aon: Oh, okay. :O Because I was thinking if new souls weren't created, would someone eventually end up as the last person in the Universe...

Mark: Bodhisattabombs? :P

Eight.

Eightfold path! Haha. :3

Yeah life and souls seem to be annoyingly persistent so...stuff.

Oh okay. :3

Also, what are the main differences between the sects (mainly Mahayana, Theravada, Tibetan and Zen)?

Okay...Buddhism is split into two or three main branches. These are Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana (if you include it as a separate branch). Theravada is the oldest of the three. It lacks a pantheon of gods specific to it and emphasizes the idea of becoming an arahant, an Enlightened being. In Theravada everyone is capable of reaching Enlightenment but they themselves have to reach it. The school I am a part of, Thai Forest, is a Theravadan school. Theravada is my specialty and some of the information I provide may not hold to Mahayana or Vajrayana.

Mahayana is the other large branch of schools. Mahayana is typically east Asian and is the more popular branch in the West. Mahayanan schools have pantheons of gods, Celestial Buddhas and Bodhisatta, that they worship and pay tribute to. Some schools are devotional schools. In the Mahayana the shepherd bodhisatta is considered the ideal that one should strive for and that becoming an arahant and just leaving is a wee bit selfish. It's very big on the idea of saving everyone from Samsara whereas Theravada likes that idea, but doesn't stress it. Theravada puts a bit more emphasis on the individual. Mahayanan Enlightenment is also something that is intrinsic to reality and life. All beings are already Buddhas. We just haven't realized it. In Theravada all beings have the potential to be Buddhas, but need to get there first. Zen and its sects are Mahayanan.

Vajrayana is esoteric or tantric Buddhism. Vajrayanan schools are by and large Mahayanan in origin. They have large sprawling pantheons and many, many rituals. Vajrayana tends to be very intricate and hard to explain to those who aren't in the know. Tibetan schools fall into Vajrayana.

Ooh, okay. :O

So from what I can tell, an arahant can choose when to leave samsara?

An arahant is someone who is Enlightened. Upon death they leave Samsara. According to Mahayana they may return after awhile because they weren't shepherd bodhisatta.

So you become the shepherd bodhisatta by helping everyone as much as you can before you die?

You become one by continuously holding off your full Enlightenment until everyone else has been saved.

Ohh, okay. :O That makes sense then. :3

Anything else you'd like to know?

I don't think so, right now at least. :3 Thanks! ^-^

I plan on going back and reading the whole thread tomorrow... correction, today... when it isn't one in the morning, but, I must say, from this description, Buddhism is the first religion that I can find no real major philosophical/moral problems with. Granted, I already pretty much knew that Buddhism was basically "yeah, that's cool," with me, but...

Hm.

Well if you have anything to ask I'll be here to answer questions for you, USAF.

There's also the coven thread if curious.

Right. I was reading the first two posts and realized that there were a lot of longposts here... and I'm tired. Watched a movie 'till one in the morning yesterday, got back up at 4, and then... yeah.

The only question I have is, what's the deal with theist v. nontheist Buddhism? My world history only touched on Buddhism briefly, and that was two years ago, so my knowledge of the religion is... rather stark, sadly.

I spend too much time learning Christian mythology.

Gods appear in the cosmology of each of the three branches. Individual schools may be nontheistic in some form or another.

So. Gods. Gods in Buddhism are defined as sentient and sapient beings that are longer lived than humans on average (gods tend to be entire species) and are physically stronger than, smarter than, more knowledgeable about the laws of the universe than, wiser than, and/or have more natural capabilities to play with the laws of the universe than human beings.

So. Gods are sufficiently advanced aliens. By and large they don't care about humanity much. A few help humans. A very rare few. Within that small number is an even smaller number that are worthy of worship. These gods are the ones that appear in Mahayana's pantheon and/or the pantheons of other religions.

When it comes to a supreme creator God we do not have one. There are Buddhists who believe in one, but the idea is not part of Buddhism. The existence of such a being is canonically met with "We do not know and it doesn't appear to be something one needs to know".

Worship of gods being important varies heavily on school. There are many devotional schools in Mahayana like Shin Pure Land (devoted to Amitabha). Worship is also important in Vajrayanan schools. It's more or less completely unimportant in Theravada save for a few schools like Thai schools (Guanyin and Hotei are worshiped in Thailand due to the large Chinese population there). Theravadan nations do tend to worship gods, but not as part of Buddhism. The festivals and what not take place at Buddhist temples, but worship of Ganga for example isn't considered a religiously Buddhist affair.

We view marriage much the same way. It's part of the country's culture and respected by Buddhism to the point where we hold very Buddhist ceremonies for it at Buddhist temples, but it is not Buddhist sacrament.

...

I like it.

I rather like it as well. That talk The Buddha gave about the matter is what convinced me to look into Buddhism more.

edited 24th Sep '11 11:38:17 PM by Aondeug

So far, Buddhism is rather interesting. I remember rather enjoying the story of the Buddha and his whole Enlightenment process, or as I like to call it, "That Time I Realized the World Doesn't End at the Back of My Fancy Yard."

Some guy goes up to him and asks about God. He talks some about God and asks The Buddha a question. The Buddha asks him how he knows what he knows. What proof does he have. And then he asks the man something to effect of "If you knew about God would you be happy? Would you never want and be in pain again if you knew about God? Is the knowledge of the nature of God absolutely necessary to your happiness?"

The answers to these questions was "Um...well...no, ".

The Buddha then said that he thinks people worry far too much about questions like "How did the universe come to be?" and "Is there a God?". He didn't think that people should be concerned so much about the origins of reality. That they should be much more concerned with how to make reality less unpleasant and how to escape it. To The Buddha the only knowledge worth knowing is that which aids in the goal of reducing suffering. You could have the knowledge of how the universe began, but from a Buddhist perspective that knowledge alone is absolutely fucking useless.

Knowledge for knowledge's sake is as bad as knowing nothing at all to a Buddhist. Now...To take that knowledge, even that which seems to be useless, and finding a way to apply it to life to aid in the goal of dealing with suffering...That makes knowledge useful. And this is what science is for from the Buddhist perspective. We learn more about how to understand the universe not merely to understand it, but to make life better.