I do not think that properly educated Buddhists pray to anyone. Popular Buddhism is somewhat syncretic and superstitious and believe in so called gods.
I think one of the problems with accepting that interpretation is that you have essentially “chosen a side” regarding a set of issues which Buddhists themselves tend to argue and debate about.
Or to put the shoe on the other foot, it would be like a Buddhist believing “sola scriptura” is what all “right-thinking” Christians believe. Or believing the correct interpretation of the writings of Isaiah find their true expression in Rabbinic Judaism as opposed to any form of Christianity.
IE: The Buddhist just stepped waist-deep into an inter/intra religious debate between Christian sects or between Christianity and another religion altogether.
In the same way that many of you Christians are quite careful in trying to contrast and compare each others set of doctrines as being Catholic, a specific type of Protestantism, Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox, the approach to questions on Buddhism should take on that same care.
In other words,
specify the type of Buddhism.
Case in point
Most of these so called “superstitions” have a rather deep meaning, and not the surface interpretation many people ascribe to them. When it comes to bodhisattvas, so called Buddhist “deities”, they are by many viewed as aspects of an enlightened mind and not beings that exist in some heavenly sphere.
Veedar’s statement rings true…depending on the type of Buddhist you are.
From the Theravadan perspective, which considers itself to be “true Buddhism” because it can trace its historical pedigree to one of the original 13 nikayas - all this talk about Bodhisattvas and many of the religious rituals associated with the various forms of Buddhism recognizable in the west gets hit with that “superstition” category.
From the various Mahayana perspectives (99% of Buddhism coming out of East Asia), a lot of merit-making rituals, chanting of mantras, and offerings to deities are perfectly valid. In fact, many of them have rather Concrete ties to suggestions and the philosophy of the Mahayana texts which serve both as holy book texts and philosophical discourses. The Theravadans are seen to be trodding upon a “lesser” path, while the Vajrayana/Tibetan Buddhists are assumed to have mixed Buddhism with some “superstition.”
Except from the Tibetan Buddhist perspective, their own rituals and yogic practices are seen as being a “higher” or at least “faster” path toward enlightenment unlike the Mahayana or Theravadans. I think one of the things i’ve often hear is that by practicing the Tantric rituals of Tibetan Buddhist, a person may yet achieve Buddhahood within 16 lifetimes, while the Mahayana folk have 3 Eons, and the Theravadans…have a really really really long time (beyond 3 eons at the very least).
And from the Western-Reformed Buddhist perspective, all of the Above is a Bunch of Superstition. Core tenents like “Karma” and “Reincarnation” which all of the 3 above accept, get reinterpreted in a manner which falls into line with a Scientific Materialist paradigm.
To add complications on top of all that:
1.) The term “Mahayana” Buddhism is about as descriptive as “Protestantism.” Think about all the various ways that Protestants disagree not with the Catholic Church, but with each other.
That pretty much expresses the diversity within Mahayana Buddhism.
2.) Even Tibetan Buddhism has 4 Different Schools.
Each School traces itself back via a lineage to an Indian master(s), who while sharing the same world view - taught in very different manners.
Which means their perspectives color the manner in which Vajrayana buddhist practice is explained.
Want a little taste of that? One of my Tibetan Buddhist friends gave me the following:
The Gelug school (of which the Dalai Lama originates out of) might make a claim like
“The Mind is Impermanent.”
The Kagyu and Nyingma schools would make the counter-claim that
“The Mind is Permanent.”
Contradiction? Seemed like it to me until i found out the following:
When the Gelug school says the “Mind is Impermanent,” they are referring to the idea that Awareness of an Object changes from moment to moment - in the sense that your mind is encountering different objects from moment to moment.
However, the Kagyu and Nyingma meaning behind “The Mind is Permanent,” refers to the mind’s awareness of an object continues forever, its basic nature remains unaffected by anything and thus never changes. The mind is a “Continuum” of awareness of objects, with neither beginning nor end.
Whether you agree with the Metaphysics is besides the point. However, you’ll notice all 3 schools don’t make mutually exclusive claims with their statements - as their statements are really about different aspects of the mind. A Gelug would accept what the Kagyu and Nyingma (except they wouldn’t phrase it that way) insight, and vice versa (the Kagyu and Nyingma just wouldn’t phrase the Gelug’s claim in that manner).
But they use the Same Words and Terminology…just in different ways.
And consider - that’s for the stuff they
can agree on. Haven’t even touched the stuff they don’t.
Going back to point of all that - all i’m trying to say is that the “Rabbit Hole” of Buddhism extends pretty far.
Just in the same manner it does for Christianity and Judaism and all the other religions you folks in the West Are Familiar with.
So you really have to nail-down what Type of Buddhism you are talking about. Otherwise, its the equivalent of saying, “All Christians Believe in the Trinity.” Or “All Jews follow the same Exact Kosher Laws.”
It just isn’t that simple.
