Buddhist History for Practitioners

download Buddhist History for Practitioners

of 15

Transcript of Buddhist History for Practitioners

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    1/15

    12

    8

    114

    22

    Discuss

    Twitter

    Facebook

    Email

    HOME MAGAZINE FALL 2010 BUDDHIST HISTORY FOR BUDDHIST PRACTITIONERS

    FEATURE

    Buddhist History for Buddhist PractitionersRita M. Gross

    Latest Magazine Comments

    ginvee commented onRenunciation

    August 3, 2011, 9:07 am

    This piece is so touching, and I want to thank

    Pema Chodron for all her wisdom and teachings.

    I first read "Start...

    Dominic Gomez commented on

    Green Koan Case 54: Nichirens

    One-Eyed Turtle

    August 3, 2011, 8:47 am

    In 1952, the chances were one out of 2.635

    billion (estimated population of human beings on

    Earth at the time) that...

    sschroll commented on

    Renunciation

    August 2, 2011, 3:25 pm

    This morning when I woke up, everything was

    dark inside. I was exhausted after following for a

    week the darkness in...

    wendy.garling commented on

    From the canon: The Vimalakirti Sutra

    August 2, 2011, 12:46 pm

    I'm curious what is meant by "converted" and

    "brought refinement" in "Within the womens

    quarters he was most...

    From the Wisdom Collection

    The Pleasure Paradox

    by Daniel Gilbert in the Fall 2005 Issue

    Starting from Scratch

    by J ames Shaheen in the Spring 2010 Issue

    New Body, Old Mind

    by Swati Chopra in the Spring 2002 Issue

    Home Magazine Retreats Gallery Blog Community

    Login / Renew

    Search Tricycle... Go

    I am convinced that an accurate, nonsectarian study of Buddhist history can be of greatbenefit to dharma practitioners. As a scholar and practitioner, I have for many years worked

    to bring the findings of historical scholarship into dharma centers in Zen, Vipassana, and

    Tibetan lineages. While many students deeply appreciate this opportunity, others find the

    approach unnerving. Modern historical studies challenge assumptions commonly held in

    Buddhist traditions, though those assumptions differ in the different forms of Buddhism.

    Let me illustrate my point with an example. For four years, I have been teaching a multipart

    course in Buddhist history at an intensive study program, or shedra, at Lotus Garden, the

    headquarters of Her Eminence Mindrolling Jetsn Khandro Rinpoche. Several of the other

    senior teachers, because of their concern that the perceived conflict between history and

    traditional lineage stories was too difficult for many students to resolve, urged me to desist

    entirely with the project. One year, I received an email after shedra informing me that a

    senior student had indeed left the meditation center because of what I had recently taught. I

    was asked what I could possibly have said that would be so upsetting. I could only guess, but I

    assumed that this student was upset by something that had figured large in my teaching that

    year, namely, the origins of the Mahayana teachings. I had said that the historical Buddha

    had not taught the Mahayana during his lifetime on earth; rather, those scriptures had

    developed, because of causes and conditions, some four hundred years later. For this student,

    that information meant that Buddhism was no truer than Christianity, and for the same

    reason: some of its beloved narratives did not hold up to historical scrutiny.

    Later that summer, Khandro Rinpoche addressed the issues herself, and she gave her

    complete support to the project of teaching history to her students. The student in question,

    who was experiencing personal difficulties at the time he left the center, eventually returned.

    The incident itself, however, indicates how important it is for Buddhist centers and groups to

    educate their students well and not to continue to teach legends as if they were factual

    accounts of history. For many, finding out that their teachers have confused legend with

    history and have not taught them to appreciate that legends are about meaning, not factual

    accuracy, can bring about a loss of confidence in dharma itself.

    My sense of urgency about teaching these courses at dharma centers is fueled by two

    SPONSOR LINKS

    Snow Lion Publications

    Contact us for a free issue of the Snow Lion:

    Buddhist News & Catalog for everything

    Tibetan Buddhist.

    The Eastern Buddhist Society

    Founded in 1921 by D. T. Suzuki and others for

    the purpose of relaying the true spirit of

    Buddhism to the modern world.

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioners

    5 03/08/2011 20:23

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    2/15

    Reply by G on January 25, 2011, 4:55 pm

    This is a fine article and I agree with 95% percent of it - indeed, I've been frustrated by many

    of the same attitudes the author repudiates.

    However, I have to take issue with the following:

    "Furthermore, Shariputra is a historical character, but Avalokiteshvara is not, and so they did

    not coexist in historical time and space, that is, in India in the fifth century B.C.E."

    Here I believe Gross has overstepped the bounds of her argument a little. According to

    traditional Buddhist beliefs, Avalokiteshvara can coexist in historical time and space with any

    historical character at any time precisely *because* he is a celestial bodhisattva and not a

    historical figure.

    Login or register to post comments

    concerns. First, I am concerned about the growing tendency toward fundamentalism in North

    American sanghas. Fundamentalism, briefly and broadly defined, is the urge to interpret

    literally the words of favorite narrativesto assume that those narratives are empirically

    accurate descriptions of physical occurrences. Literalists dismiss the suggestion that these

    stories are legends that teach profound dharma that is independent of the narratives

    empirical veracity. Second, I feel dismay at the sectarianism of many North American

    Buddhists, who eagerly praise their own lineage yet make disparaging remarks about others.

    Fundamentalism and sectarianism often combine in highly unpleasant ways. Some Buddhists

    readily dismiss other forms of Buddhism because, they claim, these other forms developed

    later and thus are not really the Buddhas teaching. Other Buddhists claim that the teachings

    followed by some are not the Buddhas full and final teachings but were merely provisional

    teachings intended for those with lower potential.

    Many Buddhists, including the His Holiness Dalai Lama, are keenly interested in modern

    science. Many claim with no small amount of pride that Buddhism is compatible with

    modern science and like to quote the Dalai Lamas famous statement If scientific analysis

    were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept

    the findings of science and abandon those claims. Given this high regard for squaring

    Buddhism with findings derived from rigorous modern scholarship, I find it curious that

    there have been few such comments about the immense contributions Western and Japanese

    historians of Buddhism have made and how little impact their work has had on Buddhist

    self-understanding. Why is this? I suggest that it is because the findings of modern historical

    studies are far more challenging to some traditional Buddhist perspectives than is modern

    science.

    Modern historical studies show the contingency and historicity of developments in religions,

    something that traditional religions dislike intensely. Historical study of religion undercuts

    the claim that any specific form, any practice or verbal doctrine, could be unmediated,

    completely definitive, and one hundred percent an absolute truth. Instead, it fosters the view

    that all religious expressions and forms are relative, that is to say, they are partially the result

    of specific causes and conditions found in their specific environments. Even a religion such as

    Buddhism, which affirms impermanence as completely central, doesnt really like to hear

    that its core teachings and institutions have changed over the years. Additionally, despite

    their emphasis on reasoning and the importance of experience, Buddhists dont like to have

    valued miracle stories challenged. But modern historical studies of religion are based on

    methods that do not take stories of supernatural intervention into historical processes

    literally, even though they take them seriously. Thus, this project of teaching Buddhist history

    for Buddhist practitioners is essentially about bringing appreciation for modern historicalconsciousness into the Buddhist shrine room.

    1 2 3 NEXT LAST

    Mindfulness Yoga with Frank Jude Boccio

    Retreats, Workshops and Trainings in

    Mindfulness Yoga, the comprehensive

    integration of the Buddha's teachings on the

    Four Foundations of Mindfulness.

    Upaya Zen Center

    Residential retreat center offering workshops

    and retreats focusing on practices and

    teachings related to engaged Buddhism, on

    how to live in our world responsibly.View all sponsors

    SPONSOR LOGOS

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioners

    5 03/08/2011 20:23

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    3/15

    If Gross wants to argue for a materialist view of the world in which there are no other realms,

    unseen beings, or rebirth, that is quite different than arguing that Buddhist history need be

    informed by the work of the modern academy. And, in my view, far more problematic.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Dominic Gomez on J anuary 25, 2011, 10:58 pm

    Hi G,

    Re: "Avalokiteshvara can coexist in historical time and space with any historical character at

    any time precisely *because* he is a celestial bodhisattva"

    You bring to mind the argument put forward in certain schools of Christianity that there are

    angels (and devils). Whether or not they exist in reality is beside the point, since they are

    celestial beings unbound by earthly laws of physics.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by G on J anuary 26, 2011, 10:25 am

    That is the very point I was making. You seem to misunderstand. Because

    celestial beings are not bound by earthly laws of physics, it is silly for Gross to

    argue that he could not have co-existed with Shariputra.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Dominic Gomez on J anuary 28, 2011, 1:40 pm

    The operative word here is "exists". The co-operative is "as what". Perceiver

    of the World's Sounds (aka Avalokiteshvara) can "exist" as an idea, a symbol

    or a notion (e.g. Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, et al.). He/She (the bi-sexual

    indication is in reference the Lotus Sutra's description of this bodhisattva's

    ability to appear as either sex in order to help human beings) can also "exist"

    as a quality of life: the potential for compassion manifested by those

    individuals so inclined.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by G on J anuary 31, 2011, 9:57 am

    Or he can exist as a celestial bodhisattva who appears to historical

    actors in person and not as a notional fantasy like the Easter Bunny. To

    be reflexively dismissive of that belief is a mistake.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Dominic Gomez on J anuary 31, 2011, 1:26 pm

    I totally understand your position. I went to Catholic school and was

    taught to believe that Christ appeared in celestial form to a select few

    three days after dying on the cross.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Richard Fidler on J anuary 27, 2011, 8:17 pm

    Western scholarship is helpful to those of us who are not Buddhists, those who are

    constructing our own religious perspective, often by combining elements of Buddhism andmodern secularism. As such a person, I am interested in Gautama's teachings as expressed

    in the oldest texts. Since religious faith is not a principle I follow, preferring to weigh new

    ideas against old understandings, I would like to drink from the well of the dharma directly,

    without bias and conviction of believers. Therein lies the value of researchers who employ

    modern methods of scholarship: what scholars know and what they don't know is left out for

    all to see. That honesty is what I must have.

    I suspect the discomfort many Buddhists feel when they are confronted with scholarly

    conclusions contrary to the tradition they subscribe to has to do with the teacher-student

    relationship. Throughout Asia--in India, China, South-east Asia, and J apan--the teacher is

    revered in a manner quite different from that of Socrates, for example. Asian teachers have

    realized the Truth; it is the student's responsibility to obey so that he/she can realize it in the

    maturation of his/her experience. Socrates would carry on dialogues with students, fully

    ready to give up his understanding if they could demonstrate he was wrong. It seems

    reasonable to me that Buddhist teachers would feel uncomfortable if a student contradicted ateaching--even if that contradiction was based upon sound scholarship. In the end, Buddhism

    is not a product of the West. It is not imbued with the give-and-take of teachers in the

    Western tradition. This is not to criticize Asian traditions, but simply to acknowledge them.

    Who is to say one tradition is better than another?

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioners

    5 03/08/2011 20:23

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    4/15

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by LeeInOK on J anuary 28, 2011, 8:48 am

    "I would like to drink ... without bias and conviction" A friend raising koi wanted to find how to

    allow for maximum growth. Experimenting within the domain of the environment found purity

    of water to be the most important factor. Within the domain of Buddhist study, seeing the

    bare naked dhamma offered in every moment of life eliminates all bias and convictions but

    those we hold for ourselves. Emptying or filtering out those bias and convictions, if possible,

    would clear the water. Contemplation of our earliest childhood memories may reveal how thedhamma has been there teaching us all along. One tool among many.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Sharon Saw on March 31, 2011, 6:01 am

    This is a great article and i like the point which is in keeping with what my spiritual guide, HE

    Tsem Tulku Rinpoche teaches - that no religion or school of Buddhism is superior to another.

    They are merely different routes with different methods to the same goal. If more people

    respected the different choices of methods and routes that people make, there would be less

    conflict in the world. In Tsem Rinpoche's book, 'Gurus for Hire, Enlightenment for Sale',

    Rinpoche strongly advocates respect for other teachers, other religions, other schools of

    thought, other dharma centres etc, which is the basis of harmony for all.

    Regarding the relationship between history and scriptures - i personally think that if it

    conflicts with the scriptures, perhaps we should focus less on what really happened than on

    what the teaching of the incident is. As is said above, "When people focus too much on the

    empirical truth or falsity of the story, its sacred meanings, which should be the main point of

    the story, are lost." Hear, hear.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by rajbodepudi on J une 11, 2011, 3:03 pm

    Both the Sutra Yana and the Maha Yana traditions seem to have started around the same

    time-the First Council. There were reportedly incidents of disagreement among Buddha's first

    generation students wrt way Maha Kashyapa conducted the First Council. The Maha

    Sanghikas (the forerunners of the Maha Yana) had a separate Council soon after the

    First-which either was not recorded, or the recordings were perhaps later destroyed.

    The Buddha was skillful in reconciling the differences between his first famous disciples whowere schooled in the Vedic tradition, known for their self-conceit, and the Kshyatriyas

    (especially, the Sakyans), other lay followers from the lower social strata and the women

    practitioners. The deep-rooted Vedic prejudices against women may have been one of the

    reasons why the Buddha was initially reluctant to admitting women into the Sangha, despite

    his step-mother's pleas culminating in a famously arduous journey, and Ananda's determined

    interventions. Most of the early disciples were reportedly rooted in the traditions of an

    "eternal self". Though my knowledge of Buddhist history is narrow and very limited, I feel

    (intuitively) this line of inquiry may yield some clues for the divergences among the

    chroniclers of Buddhist history. The Buddha obviously was aware of these schisms which

    were but inevitable. He focused on the message ("end of suffering") and devised skillful

    methods in dealing with their divergent capabilities and traits.

    Sariputra was reported to have asked the Buddha an array of questions during their first

    rendezvous and the Buddha allegedly advised him to observe Him for a year, in silence, and

    promised to answer his queries, thereafter. Sariputra was to record later that there was noneed for the Buddha to answer any of his queries since he found the answers by listening to

    the Buddha, and by following the Buddha's methods leading to deep states of meditation 7

    realization. Perhaps this may help answer some of the Buddhist history-related queries.

    Through meditation and the resulting insight perhaps one may find the answers that

    otherwise can (and did) end up as divergent views of Buddhist history

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by mpuenteduany on J uly 25, 2011, 7:14 pm

    I guess there are academics, and there are practitioners. Some people might even be both.

    But while the histories of the various schools of Buddhism are interesting and helpful in

    understanding where Buddhism came from, the only thing that really matters is practice and

    results. It doesn't matter whether any of the stories about the historical Buddha are true of

    fiction. If they're useful in teaching lessons or setting examples, fine. If not, let them go. Ifyou're seeing your life transformed by whatever it is you are practicing, keep doing it. If not,

    try something else.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioners

    5 03/08/2011 20:23

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    5/15

    Reply by ran_see on J uly 31, 2011, 7:51 pm

    This is fascinating. For many of you who have given up on your childhood Christianity and for

    all who may be unfamiliar with modern Christian thought and its attendant controversies, you

    may be surprised to know that these same discussions take place between the "defenders of

    the faith" (actually, they are defenders of some knd of literal empirical truth) - and those

    Christians who see religious truth as more deeply important than empirical/ historical fact.

    For a growing number of Christians, the historical facts of the Bible are hardly worth arguing;

    we tend to concentrate on poetic metaphorical truths of the Biblical texts and practices of

    Christianity as we see these most clearly - whether or not the narratives are historically

    accurate. I refer readers to Marcus Borg who makes many if the same arguements Rita

    Gross makes. To sum up his point of view I will quote Dr. Borg: "The Bible is true - and someof it happened."

    I think mquenteduancy on J uly 25 at 7:14 hit the nail on the head. (And I don't mean that

    literally, despite whether he/she may have actually hit a nail on the head.)

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Advertise Privacy Policy Contact Us Classifieds Customer Service About

    Reproduction of material from any Tricycle pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. Tricycle.com

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioners

    5 03/08/2011 20:23

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    6/15

    HOME MAGAZINE FALL 2010 BUDDHIST HISTORY FOR BUDDHIST PRACTITIONERS

    FEATURE

    Buddhist History for Buddhist PractitionersRita M. Gross

    Latest Magazine Comments

    ginvee commented onRenunciation

    August 3, 2011, 9:07 am

    This piece is so touching, and I want to thank

    Pema Chodron for all her wisdom and teachings.

    I first read "Start...

    Dominic Gomez commented on

    Green Koan Case 54: Nichirens

    One-Eyed Turtle

    August 3, 2011, 8:47 am

    In 1952, the chances were one out of 2.635

    billion (estimated population of human beings on

    Earth at the time) that...

    sschroll commented on

    Renunciation

    August 2, 2011, 3:25 pm

    This morning when I woke up, everything was

    dark inside. I was exhausted after following for a

    week the darkness in...

    wendy.garling commented on

    From the canon: The Vimalakirti Sutra

    August 2, 2011, 12:46 pm

    I'm curious what is meant by "converted" and

    "brought refinement" in "Within the womens

    quarters he was most...

    From the Wisdom Collection

    Appreciate Your Life

    by Maezumi Roshi in the Spring 2001 Issue

    A Perfect Storm

    by Andrew Olendzki in the Spring 2011 Issue

    When the Student is Ready, the Teacher Bites

    by Larry Rosenberg in the Fall 2009 Issue

    Home Magazine Retreats Gallery Blog Community

    Login / Renew

    Search Tricycle... Go

    My attempts to convince Buddhist practitioners that

    historical consciousness regarding Buddhism is both

    helpful and necessary emphasize that there is no

    radical disjunction between traditional Buddhism

    and the results of modern scholarship. Instead, I

    emphasize that despite adjustments to how one

    interprets some central narratives of ones tradition,

    traditional Buddhism and the results of modern

    historical scholarship are deeply consonant. I

    delineate five aspects of historical consciousness that

    are crucial for understanding what modern

    historical studies contribute to an accurate,

    nonsectarian history of Buddhism. I a lso argue that eac h of these five can deepen ones

    dharmic understanding.

    The first principle is that all relevant sources must be considered and none can be prioritized.

    In other words, familiar lineage stories are only part of the database that must be taken into

    account, and these familiar sources cannot automatically be deemed more authoritative or

    relevant than other sources. When studying history, it is hard to imagine a criterion by which

    one would exclude any source, whether near or far, familiar or unfamiliar, that would shed

    light on any aspect of Buddhist history. Two things should be emphasized here. First,

    accurate B uddhist history cannot be different for different Buddhist denominations, though

    different parts of the whole story of Buddhism will be highlighted by different denominations.

    Thus historical studies could be a gathering point for Buddhists across sectarian boundaries.

    Second, no living form of Buddhism possesses all the sources needed for a full and accuratehistory of Buddhism. Working within a sectar ian Buddhist context, one can derive only a

    partial history of Buddhism, a version of Buddhist history that most scholars would regard as

    deficient.

    What traditional Buddhist values and teachings would encourage widening the canon and

    critically reexamining familiar sources? I locate them in right speech and right view, two

    elements of the Eightfold Noble Path. Basic to right speech is telling the truth, which involves

    including all relevant information. We cant omit material just because it is unfamiliar,

    nontraditional, or would upset previous conventions. The connection with right view may be

    less direct. Fundamentally, if we lack curiosity and are unwilling to look afresh, without

    preconceptions or fixed, ideological opinions, it is impossible to develop right view.

    The second axiom for those who work with historical consciousness concerns change, or whatBuddhists call impermanence. Both for Buddhists and for historians, change should be

    regarded as normative, to be expected. However, there is often a marked contrast between

    the attitudes of traditionally religious people, Buddhists included, and those with developed

    historical consciousness. Religions often present themselves as offering protection from the

    change and vicissitudes that are characteristic of life, and they fiercely resist any internal

    change, such as new wordings of familiar liturgies, new translations of authoritative texts, or

    the development of new movements and practices. Historical consciousness, on the other

    hand, regards change as inevitable and does not evaluate that reality either positively or

    negatively. Given the easily observable fact that living religions are always changing, it is

    evident that historical consciousness is more cogent and realistic on this point.

    Buddhist resistance to the reality of historical change commonly emerges as the firm

    conviction that whatever form of Buddhism we practice is the best version of teachings ofthe (historical) Buddha. This is the basis for Mahayana and Vajrayana claims that they were

    actually taught by the historical Buddha during his lifetime and for Theravada rejection of

    those forms of Buddhism because they were not. In both cases, it is presupposed that

    Buddhism cannot and should not ever change from what was established by Shakyamuni

    Buddha in India in the fifth century B.C.E., that there should be no Buddhist history at all but

    SPONSOR LINKS

    Snow Lion Publications

    Contact us for a free issue of the Snow Lion:

    Buddhist News & Catalog for everything

    Tibetan Buddhist.

    The Eastern Buddhist Society

    Founded in 1921 by D. T. Suzuki and others for

    the purpose of relaying the true spirit of

    Buddhism to the modern world.

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...

    5 03/08/2011 20:24

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    7/15

    Reply by G on January 25, 2011, 4:55 pm

    This is a fine article and I agree with 95% percent of it - indeed, I've been frustrated by many

    of the same attitudes the author repudiates.

    However, I have to take issue with the following:

    "Furthermore, Shariputra is a historical character, but Avalokiteshvara is not, and so they did

    not coexist in historical time and space, that is, in India in the fifth century B.C.E."

    Here I believe Gross has overstepped the bounds of her argument a little. According to

    traditional Buddhist beliefs, Avalokiteshvara can coexist in historical time and space with anyhistorical character at any time precisely *because* he is a celestial bodhisattva and not a

    historical figure.

    If Gross wants to argue for a materialist view of the world in which there are no other realms,

    unseen beings, or rebirth, that is quite different than arguing that Buddhist history need be

    informed by the work of the modern academy. And, in my view, far more problematic.

    Login or register to post comments

    8

    114

    22

    Discuss

    Twitter

    Facebook

    Email

    only the constant presence of the same forms lasting for all time. This strongly held view

    seems a bit odd in a religion that also teaches that resistance to all-pervasive change is a root

    cause of misery.

    By contrast, Buddhists thoroughly informed by historical consciousness would not use a

    Buddhist sects age as the basis for accepting or rejecting it. Historical consciousness frees us

    from the common prejudices that whatever is newer is better or whatever is older is better.

    Different schools are just different, and the date of inception does not make one better or

    worse, higher or lower. With historical consciousness intact, Buddhists would not have to

    resort to ahistorical arguments that attempt to make their form of Buddhism older than it is,

    nor would they feel compelled to regard newer forms of Buddhism as invalid or irrelevant.

    Knowledge of Buddhist history can go far to counteract Buddhist sectarianism, especially the

    mutual misunderstandings so prevalent among both Mahayana and Theravada Buddhists. An

    overarching Buddhist history would have to be the same for both, meaning that with such a

    history in place, each could understand how one came to deviate from the other without

    either the rancor of Mahayana supersessionism or Theravada dismissal of non-Theravada

    Buddhists. If change, impermanence, is as basic as the Buddhadharma proclaims it to be,

    then one should expect that new movements, such as Mahayana, would develop from time to

    time.

    Change in religious forms is so constant that I correlate this dimension of historical studies

    with central Buddhist teachings about all-pervasive impermanence, which some consider the

    lynchpin of all Buddhist teaching. Thus, regarding change and impermanence, there is not

    even the slightest conflict between traditional Buddhist teachings and historical

    consciousness. In fact, they are deeply consonant. Not accepting all-pervasive impermanence

    is the root cause of suffering according to all forms of Buddhism. We suffer even more when

    we forget to apply this core teaching of impermanence to Buddhist forms themselves. If the

    reality of impermanence applies to all phenomena, then it applies to Buddhisms formsits

    institutions, practices, and verbal formulations of the dharma.

    The third point that is aff irmed by historical consciousness follows closely from the second:

    accepting change as inevitable and normative brings the realization that diversity is also

    normative and inevitable. Not only do things change, but in a large, geographically and

    socially varied region such as that covered by Buddhism, they change in different ways and at

    different rates. The internal diversity of Buddhism is therefore to be expected. Though the

    point may seem obvious, it has profound implications. Religions, including Buddhism, have

    long suffered and caused suffering because of their illusion that if people would only behave

    and think correctly, wed all practice the same religion. Simple observation of phenomena

    should convince us that religious diversity is here to stay and that our task is to learn how to

    live well with it. The only other option is perpetual sectarianism the mutual aggression,

    hostility, and competitiveness that has long plagued religions. Religious diversity itself is

    not a problem, but sectarianism is.

    At the heart of sectarianism is the tendency to regard difference as deficiency. If dif ference

    equals deficiency, then ranking will occursome different things are better and others are

    worse. While discriminations are necessary and appropriate in some cases, discrimination

    between groups of people leads to feelings of superiority by people who regard themselves as

    better and denigration of those whom they regard as inferior. Conflict inevitably results.

    1 2 3 FIRST PREVIOUS NEXT LAST

    Mindfulness Yoga with Frank Jude Boccio

    Retreats, Workshops and Trainings in

    Mindfulness Yoga, the comprehensive

    integration of the Buddha's teachings on the

    Four Foundations of Mindfulness.

    Upaya Zen Center

    Residential retreat center offering workshops

    and retreats focusing on practices and

    teachings related to engaged Buddhism, on

    how to live in our world responsibly.View all sponsors

    SPONSOR LOGOS

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...

    5 03/08/2011 20:24

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    8/15

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Dominic Gomez on J anuary 25, 2011, 10:58 pm

    Hi G,

    Re: "Avalokiteshvara can coexist in historical time and space with any historical character at

    any time precisely *because* he is a celestial bodhisattva"

    You bring to mind the argument put forward in certain schools of Christianity that there are

    angels (and devils). Whether or not they exist in reality is beside the point, since they are

    celestial beings unbound by earthly laws of physics.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by G on J anuary 26, 2011, 10:25 am

    That is the very point I was making. You seem to misunderstand. Because

    celestial beings are not bound by earthly laws of physics, it is silly for Gross to

    argue that he could not have co-existed with Shariputra.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Dominic Gomez on J anuary 28, 2011, 1:40 pm

    The operative word here is "exists". The co-operative is "as what". Perceiver

    of the World's Sounds (aka Avalokiteshvara) can "exist" as an idea, a symbolor a notion (e.g. Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, et al.). He/She (the bi-sexual

    indication is in reference the Lotus Sutra's description of this bodhisattva's

    ability to appear as either sex in order to help human beings) can also "exist"

    as a quality of life: the potential for compassion manifested by those

    individuals so inclined.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by G on J anuary 31, 2011, 9:57 am

    Or he can exist as a celestial bodhisattva who appears to historical

    actors in person and not as a notional fantasy like the Easter Bunny. To

    be reflexively dismissive of that belief is a mistake.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Dominic Gomez on J anuary 31, 2011, 1:26 pm

    I totally understand your position. I went to Catholic school and was

    taught to believe that Christ appeared in celestial form to a select few

    three days after dying on the cross.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Richard Fidler on J anuary 27, 2011, 8:17 pm

    Western scholarship is helpful to those of us who are not Buddhists, those who are

    constructing our own religious perspective, often by combining elements of Buddhism and

    modern secularism. As such a person, I am interested in Gautama's teachings as expressed

    in the oldest texts. Since religious faith is not a principle I follow, preferring to weigh newideas against old understandings, I would like to drink from the well of the dharma directly,

    without bias and conviction of believers. Therein lies the value of researchers who employ

    modern methods of scholarship: what scholars know and what they don't know is left out for

    all to see. That honesty is what I must have.

    I suspect the discomfort many Buddhists feel when they are confronted with scholarly

    conclusions contrary to the tradition they subscribe to has to do with the teacher-student

    relationship. Throughout Asia--in India, China, South-east Asia, and J apan--the teacher is

    revered in a manner quite different from that of Socrates, for example. Asian teachers have

    realized the Truth; it is the student's responsibility to obey so that he/she can realize it in the

    maturation of his/her experience. Socrates would carry on dialogues with students, fully

    ready to give up his understanding if they could demonstrate he was wrong. It seems

    reasonable to me that Buddhist teachers would feel uncomfortable if a student contradicted a

    teaching--even if that contradiction was based upon sound scholarship. In the end, Buddhism

    is not a product of the West. It is not imbued with the give-and-take of teachers in theWestern tradition. This is not to criticize Asian traditions, but simply to acknowledge them.

    Who is to say one tradition is better than another?

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...

    5 03/08/2011 20:24

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    9/15

    Reply by LeeInOK on J anuary 28, 2011, 8:48 am

    "I would like to drink ... without bias and conviction" A friend raising koi wanted to find how to

    allow for maximum growth. Experimenting within the domain of the environment found purity

    of water to be the most important factor. Within the domain of Buddhist study, seeing the

    bare naked dhamma offered in every moment of life eliminates all bias and convictions but

    those we hold for ourselves. Emptying or filtering out those bias and convictions, if possible,

    would clear the water. Contemplation of our earliest childhood memories may reveal how the

    dhamma has been there teaching us all along. One tool among many.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Sharon Saw on March 31, 2011, 6:01 am

    This is a great article and i like the point which is in keeping with what my spiritual guide, HE

    Tsem Tulku Rinpoche teaches - that no religion or school of Buddhism is superior to another.

    They are merely different routes with different methods to the same goal. If more people

    respected the different choices of methods and routes that people make, there would be less

    conflict in the world. In Tsem Rinpoche's book, 'Gurus for Hire, Enlightenment for Sale',

    Rinpoche strongly advocates respect for other teachers, other religions, other schools of

    thought, other dharma centres etc, which is the basis of harmony for all.

    Regarding the relationship between history and scriptures - i personally think that if it

    conflicts with the scriptures, perhaps we should focus less on what really happened than on

    what the teaching of the incident is. As is said above, "When people focus too much on the

    empirical truth or falsity of the story, its sacred meanings, which should be the main point of

    the story, are lost." Hear, hear.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by rajbodepudi on J une 11, 2011, 3:03 pm

    Both the Sutra Yana and the Maha Yana traditions seem to have started around the same

    time-the First Council. There were reportedly incidents of disagreement among Buddha's first

    generation students wrt way Maha Kashyapa conducted the First Council. The Maha

    Sanghikas (the forerunners of the Maha Yana) had a separate Council soon after the

    First-which either was not recorded, or the recordings were perhaps later destroyed.

    The Buddha was skillful in reconciling the differences between his first famous disciples who

    were schooled in the Vedic tradition, known for their self-conceit, and the Kshyatriyas

    (especially, the Sakyans), other lay followers from the lower social strata and the women

    practitioners. The deep-rooted Vedic prejudices against women may have been one of the

    reasons why the Buddha was initially reluctant to admitting women into the Sangha, despitehis step-mother's pleas culminating in a famously arduous journey, and Ananda's determined

    interventions. Most of the early disciples were reportedly rooted in the traditions of an

    "eternal self". Though my knowledge of Buddhist history is narrow and very limited, I feel

    (intuitively) this line of inquiry may yield some clues for the divergences among the

    chroniclers of Buddhist history. The Buddha obviously was aware of these schisms which

    were but inevitable. He focused on the message ("end of suffering") and devised skillful

    methods in dealing with their divergent capabilities and traits.

    Sariputra was reported to have asked the Buddha an array of questions during their first

    rendezvous and the Buddha allegedly advised him to observe Him for a year, in silence, and

    promised to answer his queries, thereafter. Sariputra was to record later that there was no

    need for the Buddha to answer any of his queries since he found the answers by listening to

    the Buddha, and by following the Buddha's methods leading to deep states of meditation 7

    realization. Perhaps this may help answer some of the Buddhist history-related queries.

    Through meditation and the resulting insight perhaps one may find the answers thatotherwise can (and did) end up as divergent views of Buddhist history

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by mpuenteduany on J uly 25, 2011, 7:14 pm

    I guess there are academics, and there are practitioners. Some people might even be both.

    But while the histories of the various schools of Buddhism are interesting and helpful in

    understanding where Buddhism came from, the only thing that really matters is practice and

    results. It doesn't matter whether any of the stories about the historical Buddha are true of

    fiction. If they're useful in teaching lessons or setting examples, fine. If not, let them go. If

    you're seeing your life transformed by whatever it is you are practicing, keep doing it. If not,

    try something else.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by ran_see on J uly 31, 2011, 7:51 pm

    This is fascinating. For many of you who have given up on your childhood Christianity and for

    all who may be unfamiliar with modern Christian thought and its attendant controversies, you

    may be surprised to know that these same discussions take place between the "defenders of

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...

    5 03/08/2011 20:24

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    10/15

    the faith" (actually, they are defenders of some knd of literal empirical truth) - and those

    Christians who see religious truth as more deeply important than empirical/ historical fact.

    For a growing number of Christians, the historical facts of the Bible are hardly worth arguing;

    we tend to concentrate on poetic metaphorical truths of the Biblical texts and practices of

    Christianity as we see these most clearly - whether or not the narratives are historically

    accurate. I refer readers to Marcus Borg who makes many if the same arguements Rita

    Gross makes. To sum up his point of view I will quote Dr. Borg: "The Bible is true - and some

    of it happened."

    I think mquenteduancy on J uly 25 at 7:14 hit the nail on the head. (And I don't mean that

    literally, despite whether he/she may have actually hit a nail on the head.)

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Advertise Privacy Policy Contact Us Classifieds Customer Service About

    Reproduction of material from any Tricycle pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. Tricycle.com

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...

    5 03/08/2011 20:24

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    11/15

    12

    7

    114

    22

    Discuss

    Twitter

    Facebook

    Email

    HOME MAGAZINE FALL 2010 BUDDHIST HISTORY FOR BUDDHIST PRACTITIONERS

    FEATURE

    Buddhist History for Buddhist PractitionersRita M. Gross

    Latest Magazine Comments

    ginvee commented onRenunciation

    August 3, 2011, 9:07 am

    This piece is so touching, and I want to thank

    Pema Chodron for all her wisdom and teachings.

    I first read "Start...

    Dominic Gomez commented on

    Green Koan Case 54: Nichirens

    One-Eyed Turtle

    August 3, 2011, 8:47 am

    In 1952, the chances were one out of 2.635

    billion (estimated population of human beings on

    Earth at the time) that...

    sschroll commented on

    Renunciation

    August 2, 2011, 3:25 pm

    This morning when I woke up, everything was

    dark inside. I was exhausted after following for a

    week the darkness in...

    wendy.garling commented on

    From the canon: The Vimalakirti Sutra

    August 2, 2011, 12:46 pm

    I'm curious what is meant by "converted" and

    "brought refinement" in "Within the womens

    quarters he was most...

    From the Wisdom Collection

    Cyborg Buddha

    by in the Summer 2010 Issue

    Starting from Scratch

    by J ames Shaheen in the Spring 2010 Issue

    Welcome to the Real World

    by J udith L. Lief in the Winter 2001 Issue

    Home Magazine Retreats Gallery Blog Community

    Login / Renew

    Search Tricycle... Go

    For many Buddhists, including most Mahayanists, several deeply entrenched habits of speech

    must be relinquished if we are to move beyond sectarianism. Almost all Mahayana Buddhists

    regard themselves as practicing a superior form of Buddhism, the large vehicle of greater

    aspirations, higher view, and deeper compassion, which they contrast to a so-called

    Hinayana or smaller, inferior vehicle. Many Theravadins regard themselves as practicing a

    pure or original form of Buddhism, rather than degenerate Mahayana. Because the term

    Hinayana originated in Mahayana sectarian polemics and has never been a self-designation

    used by any Buddhist group, I make a special effort to discourage use of this term whenever I

    teach Buddhist history in a Mahayana or Vajrayana context. Many Westerners who practice a

    Tibetan-based form of Buddhism find it difficult to accept and assimilate this change into

    their speech habits no matter how many times the reasons for doing so are explained.

    Nevertheless, I continue to argue that the term Hinayana simply needs to be dropped from

    our vocabulary. In a pluralistic, diverse Buddhist world that is informed by an accurate

    understanding of Buddhist history, the term Hinayana is deeply inappropriate. I also

    suggest that the idea of progressive stages of development from lower to higher may not

    be the best way to understand Buddhist internal diversity.

    Knowing how to let things be different without needing to rank them is a highly valuable skill,

    given that religious diversity, both external and internal, is inevitable. Letting things be,

    without obsessing to change or improve them, could be seen as a highly developed form of

    compassion, one of the most central of all Buddhist virtues. Many wise people have

    commented that praising ones own sect and disparaging that of another does nothing to

    improve our own denomination and may actually harm it. For those of us who have thought

    deeply about how to become more at ease with religious and cultural diversity, it is painful to

    witness the hurtful, ignorance-based sectarianism so often found in Buddhist sanghas.Accurate, nonsectarian histories of Buddhism could go far to explain how Buddhism became

    so diverse and also provide tools for regarding that diversity as a virtue, not a problem. The

    need for mutual understanding and respect in a religion that values friendliness and

    compassion as much as Buddhism does should be self-evident. Its connection with right

    speech should be so obvious as not even to need explanation or comment.

    The fourth intersection between traditional Buddhism and historical consciousness also

    involves change. Here, the emphasis is on explaining changespecifically, to call upon the

    fundamental Buddhist tool ofpratityasamutpada, or conditioned genesis, to explain the

    development of new lineages and movements within Buddhism rather than citing

    supernatural intervention into historical processes. That is to say, Buddhist understandings of

    cause and effect could be employed to explain that a movement such as Mahayana Buddhism

    developed because of social, cultural, and historical events. Most Mahayanists ignore suchexplanations, preferring a story whose empirical validity is highly questionable. According to

    legend, in the presence of the historical Buddha, Avalokiteshvara instructs Shariputra on

    emptiness. If the story is taken literally, Mahayana Buddhism originated during the lifetime

    of Shakyamuni Buddha, a claim that historians find unconvincing. Furthermore, Shariputra

    is a historical character, but Avalokiteshvara is not, and so they did not coexist in historical

    time and space, that is, in India in the fifth century B.C.E.

    Many students become intensely upset when the story they have usually been told about the

    origins of Mahayana Buddhism is critically evaluated. It is very difficult for them to

    understand that I am not asking them to question the validity of these stories, only their

    historicity. Fortunately, modern ways of discussing myth/legend and history provide tools for

    appreciating the vast corpus of Buddhist legend while, at the same time, recognizing that a

    legend is not the same thing as empirical history. For both, the overarching, major category isstory, or narrative. History and legend/myth are different kinds of stories, but both are

    stories. While philosophy is important for all religions, story or narrative is also central to

    communicating what the religion is about. Stories are easier for most people to get than

    philosophical teachings. However, for religions, the most important thing about a story is its

    message, its meaning, not its empirical verifiability. Its truth lies in the meanings it

    SPONSOR LINKS

    Snow Lion Publications

    Contact us for a free issue of the Snow Lion:

    Buddhist News & Catalog for everything

    Tibetan Buddhist.

    The Eastern Buddhist Society

    Founded in 1921 by D. T. Suzuki and others for

    the purpose of relaying the true spirit of

    Buddhism to the modern world.

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...

    5 03/08/2011 20:26

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    12/15

    Reply by G on January 25, 2011, 4:55 pm

    This is a fine article and I agree with 95% percent of it - indeed, I've been frustrated by many

    of the same attitudes the author repudiates.

    However, I have to take issue with the following:

    "Furthermore, Shariputra is a historical character, but Avalokiteshvara is not, and so they did

    not coexist in historical time and space, that is, in India in the fifth century B.C.E."

    Here I believe Gross has overstepped the bounds of her argument a little. According to

    traditional Buddhist beliefs, Avalokiteshvara can coexist in historical time and space with any

    Login or register to post comments

    communicates, not in the fac ticity of the events used to communicate those meanings.

    Because the story communicates profound meaning, its empirical verifiability is somewhat

    beside the point. Thus the same story could be empirically false, in that it did not happen that

    way in empirical space and time, but also true because of what it means. In addition to

    invoking the Buddhist notion of the two truths (absolute and relative perspectives on a single

    reality), in this c ontext one could also invoke the common Buddhist distinction between words

    and meaning.

    One could ask why Buddhist practitioners need to assimilate this somewhat complex method

    of understanding the relationship between traditional legends and modern history. I would

    respond that all Buddhists who are deeply affected by the paradigm shift engendered by the

    European enlightenment need to become clear about the relationship between symbolic

    legends and empirical history. People educated in cultures in which this paradigm reigns

    become empiricists by default. As a result, they tend to assume that traditional narratives are

    empirically accurate descriptions of events, which explains the modern heresy of

    fundamentalism. For many Westerners, truth is highly valued but is also limited to what is

    empirical. But demanding that sacred narratives be literally true is a losing proposition.

    When people focus too much on the empirical truth or falsity of the story, its sacred

    meanings, which should be the main point of the story, are lost. The relevance of Mahayana

    Buddhism does not rise or fall on the empirical accuracy of the Heart Sutra narrative but on

    whether or not the teachings of Mahayana Buddhism a re in accord with the foundational

    teachings of Buddhism.

    Finally, we come to the fifth and final point, which is where traditional Buddhadharma and

    historical consciousness find their deepest resonance. For historians, the present consensus

    about historical development is a hypothesis subject to revision as new information and

    perspectives become available. In other words, historians are eminently flexible and willing to

    change their conclusions in the light of new evidence. Flexibility of mind, rather than rigidity,

    is also regarded as a supreme virtue for meditators. Thus, both historical consciousness and

    Buddhadharma stress the importance of being comfortable with an open-ended, unfinished

    version of how things are. Both recognize that true confidence lies in being comfortable with

    process rather than needing a fixed, final conclusion. Attaining this flexible, nonideological,

    nonfixated state of mindwhat Zen practitioners might call beginners mindis the whole

    point of meditation practice.

    Rather than being something that detracts from our commitment to Buddhadharma, to some

    almost a heresy, an accurate, nonsectarian history of Buddhism can enrich and improve ones

    dharma practice immensely. This alone is a sufficient recommendation for such study. But

    the study of Buddhist history brings other benefits as well, such as providing tools to

    appreciate Buddhist internal diversity and thus promote greater communication within the

    greater Buddhist community. Perhaps most important, it allows us to develop a seamless

    account of Buddhism and modernity. For nothing is sadder than a religions demand that we

    turn off our critica l intelligence when its traditions conflict with well-established results of

    modern science and history. The depth of Buddhadharma does not need such mindless

    acquiescence to convention.

    Rita M. Gross is an author, dharma teacher, and professor of comparative studies in

    religion. Her best-known books areBuddhism after Patriarchy: A F eminist History,

    Analysis, and Reconstruction of Buddhism andA Garland of Feminist Reflections: Forty

    Years of Religious Exploration. She teaches workshops on meditation and buddhadharma at

    many meditations centers in the United States and Canada.

    Artwork byLeigh Wells

    1 2 3 FIRST PREVIOUS

    Mindfulness Yoga with Frank Jude Boccio

    Retreats, Workshops and Trainings in

    Mindfulness Yoga, the comprehensive

    integration of the Buddha's teachings on the

    Four Foundations of Mindfulness.

    Upaya Zen Center

    Residential retreat center offering workshops

    and retreats focusing on practices and

    teachings related to engaged Buddhism, on

    how to live in our world responsibly.View all sponsors

    SPONSOR LOGOS

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...

    5 03/08/2011 20:26

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    13/15

    historical character at any time precisely *because* he is a celestial bodhisattva and not a

    historical figure.

    If Gross wants to argue for a materialist view of the world in which there are no other realms,

    unseen beings, or rebirth, that is quite different than arguing that Buddhist history need be

    informed by the work of the modern academy. And, in my view, far more problematic.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Dominic Gomez on J anuary 25, 2011, 10:58 pm

    Hi G,

    Re: "Avalokiteshvara can coexist in historical time and space with any historical character at

    any time precisely *because* he is a celestial bodhisattva"

    You bring to mind the argument put forward in certain schools of Christianity that there are

    angels (and devils). Whether or not they exist in reality is beside the point, since they are

    celestial beings unbound by earthly laws of physics.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by G on J anuary 26, 2011, 10:25 am

    That is the very point I was making. You seem to misunderstand. Because

    celestial beings are not bound by earthly laws of physics, it is silly for Gross to

    argue that he could not have co-existed with Shariputra.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Dominic Gomez on J anuary 28, 2011, 1:40 pm

    The operative word here is "exists". The co-operative is "as what". Perceiver

    of the World's Sounds (aka Avalokiteshvara) can "exist" as an idea, a symbol

    or a notion (e.g. Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, et al.). He/She (the bi-sexual

    indication is in reference the Lotus Sutra's description of this bodhisattva's

    ability to appear as either sex in order to help human beings) can also "exist"

    as a quality of life: the potential for compassion manifested by those

    individuals so inclined.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by G on J anuary 31, 2011, 9:57 am

    Or he can exist as a celestial bodhisattva who appears to historical

    actors in person and not as a notional fantasy like the Easter Bunny. To

    be reflexively dismissive of that belief is a mistake.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Dominic Gomez on J anuary 31, 2011, 1:26 pm

    I totally understand your position. I went to Catholic school and was

    taught to believe that Christ appeared in celestial form to a select few

    three days after dying on the cross.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Richard Fidler on J anuary 27, 2011, 8:17 pm

    Western scholarship is helpful to those of us who are not Buddhists, those who are

    constructing our own religious perspective, often by combining elements of Buddhism and

    modern secularism. As such a person, I am interested in Gautama's teachings as expressed

    in the oldest texts. Since religious faith is not a principle I follow, preferring to weigh new

    ideas against old understandings, I would like to drink from the well of the dharma directly,

    without bias and conviction of believers. Therein lies the value of researchers who employ

    modern methods of scholarship: what scholars know and what they don't know is left out for

    all to see. That honesty is what I must have.

    I suspect the discomfort many Buddhists feel when they are confronted with scholarly

    conclusions contrary to the tradition they subscribe to has to do with the teacher-student

    relationship. Throughout Asia--in India, China, South-east Asia, and J apan--the teacher is

    revered in a manner quite different from that of Socrates, for example. Asian teachers have

    realized the Truth; it is the student's responsibility to obey so that he/she can realize it in the

    maturation of his/her experience. Socrates would carry on dialogues with students, fully

    ready to give up his understanding if they could demonstrate he was wrong. It seems

    reasonable to me that Buddhist teachers would feel uncomfortable if a student contradicted a

    teaching--even if that contradiction was based upon sound scholarship. In the end, Buddhism

    is not a product of the West. It is not imbued with the give-and-take of teachers in the

    Western tradition. This is not to criticize Asian traditions, but simply to acknowledge them.

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...

    5 03/08/2011 20:26

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    14/15

    Who is to say one tradition is better than another?

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by LeeInOK on J anuary 28, 2011, 8:48 am

    "I would like to drink ... without bias and conviction" A friend raising koi wanted to find how to

    allow for maximum growth. Experimenting within the domain of the environment found purity

    of water to be the most important factor. Within the domain of Buddhist study, seeing the

    bare naked dhamma offered in every moment of life eliminates all bias and convictions but

    those we hold for ourselves. Emptying or filtering out those bias and convictions, if possible,

    would clear the water. Contemplation of our earliest childhood memories may reveal how thedhamma has been there teaching us all along. One tool among many.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by Sharon Saw on March 31, 2011, 6:01 am

    This is a great article and i like the point which is in keeping with what my spiritual guide, HE

    Tsem Tulku Rinpoche teaches - that no religion or school of Buddhism is superior to another.

    They are merely different routes with different methods to the same goal. If more people

    respected the different choices of methods and routes that people make, there would be less

    conflict in the world. In Tsem Rinpoche's book, 'Gurus for Hire, Enlightenment for Sale',

    Rinpoche strongly advocates respect for other teachers, other religions, other schools of

    thought, other dharma centres etc, which is the basis of harmony for all.

    Regarding the relationship between history and scriptures - i personally think that if it

    conflicts with the scriptures, perhaps we should focus less on what really happened than on

    what the teaching of the incident is. As is said above, "When people focus too much on the

    empirical truth or falsity of the story, its sacred meanings, which should be the main point of

    the story, are lost." Hear, hear.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by rajbodepudi on J une 11, 2011, 3:03 pm

    Both the Sutra Yana and the Maha Yana traditions seem to have started around the same

    time-the First Council. There were reportedly incidents of disagreement among Buddha's first

    generation students wrt way Maha Kashyapa conducted the First Council. The Maha

    Sanghikas (the forerunners of the Maha Yana) had a separate Council soon after the

    First-which either was not recorded, or the recordings were perhaps later destroyed.

    The Buddha was skillful in reconciling the differences between his first famous disciples whowere schooled in the Vedic tradition, known for their self-conceit, and the Kshyatriyas

    (especially, the Sakyans), other lay followers from the lower social strata and the women

    practitioners. The deep-rooted Vedic prejudices against women may have been one of the

    reasons why the Buddha was initially reluctant to admitting women into the Sangha, despite

    his step-mother's pleas culminating in a famously arduous journey, and Ananda's determined

    interventions. Most of the early disciples were reportedly rooted in the traditions of an

    "eternal self". Though my knowledge of Buddhist history is narrow and very limited, I feel

    (intuitively) this line of inquiry may yield some clues for the divergences among the

    chroniclers of Buddhist history. The Buddha obviously was aware of these schisms which

    were but inevitable. He focused on the message ("end of suffering") and devised skillful

    methods in dealing with their divergent capabilities and traits.

    Sariputra was reported to have asked the Buddha an array of questions during their first

    rendezvous and the Buddha allegedly advised him to observe Him for a year, in silence, and

    promised to answer his queries, thereafter. Sariputra was to record later that there was noneed for the Buddha to answer any of his queries since he found the answers by listening to

    the Buddha, and by following the Buddha's methods leading to deep states of meditation 7

    realization. Perhaps this may help answer some of the Buddhist history-related queries.

    Through meditation and the resulting insight perhaps one may find the answers that

    otherwise can (and did) end up as divergent views of Buddhist history

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Reply by mpuenteduany on J uly 25, 2011, 7:14 pm

    I guess there are academics, and there are practitioners. Some people might even be both.

    But while the histories of the various schools of Buddhism are interesting and helpful in

    understanding where Buddhism came from, the only thing that really matters is practice and

    results. It doesn't matter whether any of the stories about the historical Buddha are true of

    fiction. If they're useful in teaching lessons or setting examples, fine. If not, let them go. Ifyou're seeing your life transformed by whatever it is you are practicing, keep doing it. If not,

    try something else.

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...

    5 03/08/2011 20:26

  • 8/22/2019 Buddhist History for Practitioners

    15/15

    Reply by ran_see on J uly 31, 2011, 7:51 pm

    This is fascinating. For many of you who have given up on your childhood Christianity and for

    all who may be unfamiliar with modern Christian thought and its attendant controversies, you

    may be surprised to know that these same discussions take place between the "defenders of

    the faith" (actually, they are defenders of some knd of literal empirical truth) - and those

    Christians who see religious truth as more deeply important than empirical/ historical fact.

    For a growing number of Christians, the historical facts of the Bible are hardly worth arguing;

    we tend to concentrate on poetic metaphorical truths of the Biblical texts and practices of

    Christianity as we see these most clearly - whether or not the narratives are historically

    accurate. I refer readers to Marcus Borg who makes many if the same arguements Rita

    Gross makes. To sum up his point of view I will quote Dr. Borg: "The Bible is true - and someof it happened."

    I think mquenteduancy on J uly 25 at 7:14 hit the nail on the head. (And I don't mean that

    literally, despite whether he/she may have actually hit a nail on the head.)

    LOGIN or REGISTER to post comments

    Advertise Privacy Policy Contact Us Classifieds Customer Service About

    Reproduction of material from any Tricycle pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. Tricycle.com

    dhist History for Buddhist Practitioners | Tricycle http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-history-buddhist-practitioner...