Anyone got questions about Buddhism?

[Hastrman]

Has a dog Buddha-nature or not?

and

If you had been there, could you have saved the cat?

Why would I want to save the cat? It being cut in half was necessary for the explication of Zen; besides, the whole thing happened in a dialogue–no animals were harmed in the writing of this discourse.

And, as to the Buddha-nature of the dog:

無.

You might have to turn on Chinese encoding.

 

[Hastrman]

Some Buddhist writers speak of Nirvana in rather different terms, arguing that our egotistical desires are extinguished, but that Nirvana is ineffable and cannot simply be described as nonexistence–indeed, it could be described as pure bliss.

Not really; it’s only bliss in comparison to the veil of suffering we call existence.

Furthermore, Pure Land Buddhists do seek heaven–that’s what the “Pure Land” essentially is. Granted, this is penultimate (the final goal is still nirvana), but if I’m not mistaken many Pure Land Buddhists believe that nirvana is not a possible goal in this age of the decay of Buddha’s teachings.

They don’t think Nirvana is reachable in this age, but ultimately it is–in a sense, they believe they’re going to be spending a lot of time in purgatory (which is closer, mutatis mutandis, to what the Pure Land is).

Again, I’m not sure this is the best way to describe it.

Well, no, it’s an over-simplification. But getting out of the trap/sinking ship that is existence is the fundamental idea of Buddhism, and the value of the things that keep you here, other than humans, is illusory.

Do you mean ancient Indian Buddhism as known from texts? Theravada Buddhism isn’t any more Indian than Mahayana, is it? (Unless you count Ceylon as India.)

Ceylon is a lot closer to India than China is, geographically and culturally. And there’s Theravada Buddhism elsewhere, including parts of India and Thailand. “Indian Buddhism” is a sort of shorthand, and no, it’s not strictly accurate. I mostly meant “Southeast Asian Buddhism” but it doesn’t have the same ring.

Most scholars agree Southeast Asian Buddhism’s closer to the original form of Buddhism. Not, of course, that anyone knows that original form. We’re not even able to pin down Buddha’s life to within two centuries–he might have been almost contemporary with Plato.

 

[b_justb]

Why would I want to save the cat? It being cut in half was necessary for the explication of Zen; besides, the whole thing happened in a dialogue–no animals were harmed in the writing of this discourse.

And, as to the Buddha-nature of the dog:

無.

You might have to turn on Chinese encoding.

You asked for questions, I asked the two I wanted to.

You didn’t answer either of them.

無. is Joshu’s reply not your own. Maybe you have only 9 fingers.

 

[Hastrman]

You asked for questions, I asked the two I wanted to.

You didn’t answer either of them.

無. is Joshu’s reply not your own. Maybe you have only 9 fingers.

無 is the correct answer, from the perspective of Zen. There is 無 Buddha-nature, there is 無 heart, there is 無 sword. I don’t believe in Buddha-nature, so my answer would be “No. Nor do you, and nor do I.”

And I did answer the first: “why would I want to do something” means, in human speech, “no, I wouldn’t do it”. Cutting the cat in half, without hesitation, revealed the true nature of Zen.

Also, nobody can do anything if their will’s not in it, so no, I couldn’t save the cat, because I wouldn’t want to.

Unless you’re thinking in terms of Life-Giving Sword, that it would be compassionate to cut him down before he could sin by killing the cat?

But as I said, it was just a dialogue–it never really happened.

 

[buzzcut]

And there’s Theravada Buddhism elsewhere, including parts of India and Thailand. “Indian Buddhism” is a sort of shorthand, and no, it’s not strictly accurate. I mostly meant “Southeast Asian Buddhism” but it doesn’t have the same ring.

Perhaps a better term would be “Pali Buddhism” defined, somewhat circularly, as the form of Buddhism given in the Pali canon.

 

[Hastrman]

Perhaps a better term would be “Pali Buddhism” defined, somewhat circularly, as the form of Buddhism given in the Pali canon.

Good idea.

Let us call it Pali Buddhism.

I certainly hope it doesn’t come up again, though, because I don’t know that much about it.

 

[rossum]

But he answered, 無 wu, meaning “there is not.”

I have often thought that, for English speakers, “woof!” would be a better translation.

In the same way, you neither become existent or non-existent in Nirvana–there is no longer any “you” to be either.

There never was any “you” in the first place. Nirvana is the realisation that what you thought was you wasn’t.

rossum

 

[patrick457]

Why would I want to save the cat? It being cut in half was necessary for the explication of Zen; besides, the whole thing happened in a dialogue–no animals were harmed in the writing of this discourse.

And, as to the Buddha-nature of the dog:

無.

You might have to turn on Chinese encoding.

Is that that Zen koan where the monk was asked if dogs have Buddha nature? the monk then said ‘Mu’ (in Japanese, it is ‘Wu’ in Chinese as others have already pointed out).

 

[thistle]

You don’t speak for everybody here. Other folks here obviously have an interest in Buddhism. Note the name of this forum: Non-catholic religions. Buddhism is not catholic,** but it is a religion./**QUOTE]

A false religion!

 

[b_justb]

無 is the correct answer, from the perspective of Zen. There is 無 Buddha-nature, there is 無 heart, there is 無 sword. I don’t believe in Buddha-nature, so my answer would be “No. Nor do you, and nor do I.”

Interesting. I think it’s challenging to correctly respond with an ideology that one does not adhere to. You’ve said plainly that you are Catholic but have studied or continue to study eastern thought, Buddhism especially. I actively studied and practiced Taoist and Zen ideas for about 15 years.

In the school of Zen Buddhism, there is no right or wrong answers, there is only what is. Mu (or Wu) isn’t a correct response to the koan, for there is not a correct response to any koan. Enlightenment in the Zen tradition is something determined by master of student at and in the moment. This is why the fingers were cut off by the posers that copied the Zen equates to holding up one finger.

I think you’re in a tough spot trying to answer questions concerning an ideology you don’t adhere to. I had a great philosophy teacher in college and he was a tough nut to crack. As we studied various philosophical ideas he would devote his responses to questions in the line of thinking to that particular philosopher. I could not detect in him any deviation to the thought being taught and his actual ideas about it until about half way through the semester. Very interesting conversations, but I think it’s very hard to do.

Good luck.

 

[chrisb]

It seems to me that a lot of Christians don’t know a thing about Buddhism, as it actually exists. And I’m absolutely certain that many people who claim to be Buddhists don’t.

So I thought I’d make a thread to help with any questions. Be aware I don’t have a degree or anything (anything below a PhD just seems to make things worse anyway), but I have an interest in world religions. I’m Catholic, and nothing will change that, but I’m fascinated by human approaches to God. Or in the case of Buddhism, completely ignoring God as irrelevant.

I haven’t read much of the Sutras (the Buddhist scriptures), but frankly neither have most Buddhists outside the clergy. That right there would be an example of things Westerners don’t seem to get–Buddhism is not Sola Scriptura Protestantism.

I know the most about Japanese/Chinese/Korean Buddhism, but I also know a thing or two about Tibetan and Indian.

Any questions? I’ll see what I can do.

Grace and Peace,

Why was 200,000 Christian Japanese crucified by Buddhists? What was the point? Reincarnation into Buddhists?

 

[mikew262]

mikew262;1886339:

You don’t speak for everybody here. Other folks here obviously have an interest in Buddhism. Note the name of this forum: Non-catholic religions. Buddhism is not catholic,** but it is a religion./**

QUOTE]

A false religion!

So? Many probably claim Christianity is a false religion. What’s your point? Whether it’s false or not is not a criteria for discussing it on this forum.

 

[KarenNC]

Why was 200,000 Christian Japanese crucified by Buddhists?

Could you give a reference for this event? I haven’t heard of it before and can find no mention of such online at the moment, including in the Catholic Encyclopedia’s article on Japan.

 

[rossum]

Could you give a reference for this event? I haven’t heard of it before and can find no mention of such online at the moment, including in the Catholic Encyclopedia’s article on Japan.

Japanese Martyrs

rossum

 

[Gearoidin]

Could you give a reference for this event? I haven’t heard of it before and can find no mention of such online at the moment, including in the Catholic Encyclopedia’s article on Japan.

I have never heard the figure of 200,000 either but from “The Christian Century in Japan” C.R. Boxer , University of California Press, 1951, 5000 or 6000 Christians were killed between 1614-40 alone. This book is an excellent source if you are intersted in the history of Christainity in Japan.

The edict of expulsion of Christians from Japan was issued in 1614 and it is estimated that there were about 300,000 christians in Japan at that time (the population of the whole country is estimated to have been around 20 million). The 3rd Tokugawa Shogun, Iemitsu, was the most savage in his attempts to totally wipe out Christainity and he almost succeeded apart from the crypto-Christians who kept their faith .

The most famous of the Christain martyrs are “The 26 Martyrs of Japan” who were crucified in February 1597. There were numerous others, including the burning to death of 55 people (including very young children in their mothers’ arms) on the dry bed of the Kamo River in Kyoto in October 1619. This event was witnessed by somewhere between 30,000-150,000 people (depending on the writer)who chanted the Magnificat, and psalms while the martyrs were still alive, and finally the Te Deum when they had all died.

Gearoidin

 

[Deo_Volente]

Grace & Peace!

Technically speaking, the “hum” at the end of many Buddhist mantras, for instance “Om mani padme hum,” the mantra of the Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara/Guan Yin, means something like “is a god.” But it’s not an exact meaning; “Om” and “Hum” are linguistically sketchy words.

Just wanting to point something out. These definitions are from Robert Thurman’s fantastic (really really fantastic) translation of the Tibetan Book of the Dead/Liberation through Understanding in the Between:

OM: This mantric syllable is called the “body-vajra of all Buddhas.” It invokes the power of the divine and universal, resonating with its omnipresence, and therefore occurs at the beginning of most other mantras.

HUM: This mantra syllable is known as the quntessential “mind-vajra” of all Buddhas, symbolizing the integration of the universal, absolute, and divine within the particular individual. Thus it often occurs at the end of mantras, signifying that the spiritual attainment, deity, or positive energy invoked has been integrated within the indivdiual. It may correspond in some respects to the Christian Amen that concludes all prayers.

The mantra Om Mane Padme Hum means something like: OM! The Jewel in the Lotus! HUM! The jewel in the lotus being a reference to compassion as the heart of reality, which is quite consonant with the understanding of Hundred-Armed Avalokitesvara or Kuan Yun (who some believe is actually patterned after the Virgin Mary from contact the East had with images of our Lady through the Silk Road caravans).

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!

 

[KarenNC]

I have never heard the figure of 200,000 either but from “The Christian Century in Japan” C.R. Boxer , University of California Press, 1951, 5000 or 6000 Christians were killed between 1614-40 alone. This book is an excellent source if you are intersted in the history of Christainity in Japan…

Thanks, that’s more helpful and gives me a better picture of the time period, extent of the issue, other issues that may have played into it than just religion, who ordered it (political vs. religious leaders), that it was not a single event, etc.

 

[Hastrman]

Grace and Peace,

Why was 200,000 Christian Japanese crucified by Buddhists? What was the point? Reincarnation into Buddhists?

It was a lot less, and they were actually killed all kinds of different ways.

1. Tokugawa Ieyasu, the founder of the Tokugawa Shougunate, feared that the Franciscans and Jesuits were just paving the way for a Spanish invasion.
2. His claim to be Shougun rested on a claim to membership in a noble clan–which was forged. He needed all the support he could get, and the Buddhist monasteries were extremely powerful in Japanese politics. He also increased the power of the samurai for the same reason, needing their support.
3. He had been a vassal to Oda “Devil King” Nobunaga, who had looted the Shingon monasteries in Iga and Koga provinces. He needed to distance himself from that legacy in order to succeed politically.

His descendents simply carried on that program of legitimizing their rule. Iemitsu-*shougun *was probably so savage because he was in many ways a child. For instance, when his sword teacher Yagyuu Munenori lay on his deathbed, Iemitsu continued to press him with the question, “Are you sure you’ve taught me all the techniques in the Shinkage style?” Only when Munenori had given his solemn oath that he had did Iemitsu pay the dying man his respects.

 

[Hastrman]

Just wanting to point something out. These definitions are from Robert Thurman’s fantastic (really really fantastic) translation of the Tibetan Book of the Dead/Liberation through Understanding in the Between:

OM: This mantric syllable is called the “body-vajra of all Buddhas.” It invokes the power of the divine and universal, resonating with its omnipresence, and therefore occurs at the beginning of most other mantras.

HUM: This mantra syllable is known as the quntessential “mind-vajra” of all Buddhas, symbolizing the integration of the universal, absolute, and divine within the particular individual. Thus it often occurs at the end of mantras, signifying that the spiritual attainment, deity, or positive energy invoked has been integrated within the indivdiual. It may correspond in some respects to the Christian Amen that concludes all prayers.

The mantra Om Mane Padme Hum means something like: OM! The Jewel in the Lotus! HUM! The jewel in the lotus being a reference to compassion as the heart of reality, which is quite consonant with the understanding of Hundred-Armed Avalokitesvara or Kuan Yun (who some believe is actually patterned after the Virgin Mary from contact the East had with images of our Lady through the Silk Road caravans).

Actually the Dalai Lama doesn’t like Thurman’s stuff, because he’s too much of a sincretist.

Thurman is, I believe, part Tibetan, but his Sanskrit’s apparently bad (I hear–I know about six words of Sanskrit). “Om mani padme hum” is closer to, “Om Jewel Lotus God,” which is one of the titles of Avalokitesvara.

And Guan Yin as a goddess cannot be traced to any associations with Mary until the Kakurekurishitans, the Crypto-Christians of Japan, made their Kannon Madonnas (Kannon is the Japanese reading of Guan Yin). Guan Yin is actually the result of conflating Avalokitesvara with a Taoist immortal/god of childbirth and mercy.

Similarly, Jizou is the result of conflating the bodhisattva Ksitigarbha with a Chinese god of the underworld. Iconography wise, anyway–he’s a lot more “purely” Buddhist than Guan Yin.

 

[Montalban]

LOL! That has to be one of the more ridiculously hubristic statements I’ve ever seen.
Edwin

I agree. I asked how does he know this to be true. Still waiting for the answer