The six realms are the more well known ones. Actually, there are thirty one planes of existence.
|
By Professor K. N. Jayatilleke PhD. (Lond) |
|
Now what would be the attitude of Buddhism to other religions? Perhaps the Sandaka Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya seems to supply the answer to this question. In it Ananda describes four types of false religions and four types of unsatisfactory religions, and goes on to define the character of the religion of the Buddha. |
Four False Religions
Of the four false religions the first is said to be that of materialism which holds that man is composed entirely of material elements which disintegrate at death and as a result denies survival of any sort. It is worth noting that seven such materialist schools are mentioned in the Buddhist texts. One of these schools held that consciousness was a by-product of certain chemicals being mixed in their due proportions. Though materialism as a philosophy of life is thus condemned it is necessary to add that neither the world of matter on the mental life of individuals as well as of society is denied. It is significant that the Buddha held poverty or "the inequitable distribution of goods in society" as the root cause of social evil and argued that the economic factor was as powerful a determinant of social evolution as the ideological factor.
The second of the false religions is any religion which denies moral values. Thus all religious cults, which recommend a moral ethic or immoral practices would be condemned outright.
The third of the false religion is any religion which denies causation and teaches that "people are miraculously saved" (ahetu appaccaya satta vissujjanthi). The Buddhist teaching is that all events in the phenomenal world are subject to causal laws and that no miracles which go against the operation of such causal laws are possible. It is said that there are physical laws. The law that morally good acts results in pleasant consequences and morally evil acts in unpleasant consequences for the individual is an instance of moral law. Though causation is thus upheld, it is important to observe that it is distinguished on the one hand from complete Indeterminism (sdjicca samuppanna) or Accidentalism and on the other from Strict Determinism (niyati-vada) or Fatalism. In an indeterminists universe there would be no correlation between events and as such no causes or effects.
The fourth type of false religion is any religion which denies freewill. Freewill is conceived of as the capacity of the individual (atta-kara) or the factor of human effort (purisa-kara), which can within limits control or direct the operative forces of the past and present in order to make the future different from what it would otherwise have been. As such freewill is considered to be compatible with the Buddhist conception of events. All from of determinism whether of natural determinism (sabhava-vada) which holds that the present and the future is the mere working out of the past or of Theistic determinism (issara-nimmana-vada) which holds that everything that takes place is predetermined by the will or fiat of God, are specifically mentioned and condemned as false.
It would appear from the above four types of religion condemned as false that Buddhism upholds survival, asserts moral values, teaches causation without implying Strict Determinism and maintains the freedom of the will in the sense defined.
Now the first of the four religions, condemned as unsatisfactory, but not necessarily false is a religion which claims omniscience for its teacher or in other words deifies its teacher. It is argued that what is unsatisfactory about this type of religion is that the lack of omniscience on the part of such a teacher would be evident from a historical account of his life and teaching.
The second such unsatisfactory religion is any religion based on a revolutionary tradition. It is said that such supposed revelations may be true or false. It is evident that in the face of mutually contradictory claims to revelation on the part of different religions that all such claims cannot be true. The validity of a claim to revelation has to be tested in the light of verifiable facts before such a claim can be established. But if so, verification would take the place of revelation as the criterion of the truth of a revelations claim. It is interesting to note that of a predominance the priority of revelationed claims when it says that the validity of such claims can be established only when they are validity of such claims can be established only when they are borne out by observable facts. "When a prophet speaks the in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously; thou shalt not be afraid of him" (Deuteronomy).
The third type of unsatisfactory religion which is not necessarily false is any religion based on mere "logical reasoning and metaphysical speculation (takka-pariya-hatam vimamsanu caritam)" on the grounds that such reasoning may be true or false. Logic, as we now know, can only help metaphysics or mathematics to construct self-consistent systems. It does not by any means guarantee that any such system had applicability to the real world and is therefore true, a fact which can only be established independently of logic by seeing which system can best explain and account for verifiable facts.
The fourth such unsatisfactory religion is any religion which is inconsistent. This is unsatisfactory for the obvious reason that truth must be self-consistent and not self-contradictory, though this does not mean that any self-consistent system of belief is necessarily true for it may have the defects of the third type.
In contrast to the above types of false and unsatisfactory religions Buddhism is stated in the from of a verifiable scientific theory, whose truth is said to have been verified by the Buddha and hundreds of his disciples and can be personally verified by anyone who adopts it. As such its truth is independent of the founder who like a scientist merely discovers it and proclaims it for the guidance of others; and it is left to others to test its validity and worth.
It should be clear from the above that the Buddhist attitude to other religions cannot be classified as one of dominance, fulfillment or cooperation. The attitude would depend on the nature of the religion dealt with. Buddhism would in the light of the facts of existence condemn some religions as false, uphold others as partially true and would not rule out the possibility of another religion being entirely true, since truth need not be the monopoly of any particular individual or religion. But this condemnation or appraisal would not be done with the intention of abusing or flattering others but in the hope that in the process of mutual inquiry and criticism people would acquire a better vision of the truth. And it is of the nature of truth that it need not be and cannot be forced down the throats of others by exploiting their poverty, ignorance, or weak state of health or by using threats or claiming powers from above over the lives of others. It is also of the nature of truth that it brings people together but it is a unity that has to be achieved by a common quest flowering in a common vision.<<Back
Introducing The Writer
Professor K. N. Jayatilleke PhD. (Lond) Born 1 Nov. 1920 Educated at the Royal College Colombo. University of Ceylon, and at Christ College Cambridge (1946-49) Prof, of Western and Eastern Philosophy. University of Ceylon. Read papers at Oxford, Harvard (USA) Published: Early Buddhist Theory of knowledge. Died 23 July 1970.
http://www.maithri.com/links/articles/buddhist_attitude_1.htm
Originally posted by Weychin:The six realms are the more well known ones. Actually, there are thirty one planes of existence.
Can you elaborate on thirty one planes of existence ? Are you referring to 33 levels of heavens ? Are they the same ? Just curious.
.
Originally posted by Weychin:
Buddhist Attitude To Other Religions
By Professor K. N. Jayatilleke PhD. (Lond)
Courtesy Vesak Lipi
If we consider possible attitudes of one religion towards another in the light of history, they seem to be classifiable under three main headings. The first is that of dominance based on the belief that one's religion alone contains the full truth and that other religions are either completely false or contain so few elements of truth that the sooner they are ousted by whatever means at one's disposal the better it would be for mankind. The next is the attitude of fulfilment which draws its strength from the belief that while other religions contain important elements of truth they find their fullest is the attitude of co-operation which arises out of a conviction that (a) all religions contain aspects of truth and a study of all is necessary to discover the whole truth or (b) that all the higher religions are equally true and that the ostensible differences are due to differences in language rather than in content, and that all these religions are suited to their traditional contexts and (c) that all the higher religions are equally true but some of these religions have a greater attraction for certain types of individuals as against other, the cerebratonics liking a religion with an intellectual appeal, the somatogenics one that stresses action and the viscerotonics, emotion.Now what would be the attitude of Buddhism to other religions? Perhaps the Sandaka Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya seems to supply the answer to this question. In it Ananda describes four types of false religions and four types of unsatisfactory religions, and goes on to define the character of the religion of the Buddha.
Aiya, those who find Buddhism not thorough, incomplete, unsatisfactory, not up to their standard, please go join other religion lah. Or start a new religion.
But please dun come import other religion (Christianity, Islam, etc etc) into Buddhism under the banner of Buddhism hor. 'cause its not Buddhism. Its some form of new age religion or something.
Originally posted by Dawnfirstlight:Can you elaborate on thirty one planes of existence ? Are you referring to 33 levels of heavens ? Are they the same ? Just curious.
Tabulated to show the various planes of existence.
Originally posted by realization:Tabulated to show the various planes of existence.
Thanks.
Originally posted by Weychin:Buddhist Attitude To Other Religions
By Professor K. N. Jayatilleke PhD. (Lond)
Courtesy Vesak Lipi
If we consider possible attitudes of one religion towards another in the light of history, they seem to be classifiable under three main headings. The first is that of dominance based on the belief that one's religion alone contains the full truth and that other religions are either completely false or contain so few elements of truth that the sooner they are ousted by whatever means at one's disposal the better it would be for mankind. The next is the attitude of fulfilment which draws its strength from the belief that while other religions contain important elements of truth they find their fullest is the attitude of co-operation which arises out of a conviction that (a) all religions contain aspects of truth and a study of all is necessary to discover the whole truth or (b) that all the higher religions are equally true and that the ostensible differences are due to differences in language rather than in content, and that all these religions are suited to their traditional contexts and (c) that all the higher religions are equally true but some of these religions have a greater attraction for certain types of individuals as against other, the cerebratonics liking a religion with an intellectual appeal, the somatogenics one that stresses action and the viscerotonics, emotion.Now what would be the attitude of Buddhism to other religions? Perhaps the Sandaka Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya seems to supply the answer to this question. In it Ananda describes four types of false religions and four types of unsatisfactory religions, and goes on to define the character of the religion of the Buddha.
[truncated]
It should be clear from the above that the Buddhist attitude to other religions cannot be classified as one of dominance, fulfillment or cooperation. The attitude would depend on the nature of the religion dealt with. Buddhism would in the light of the facts of existence condemn some religions as false, uphold others as partially true and would not rule out the possibility of another religion being entirely true, since truth need not be the monopoly of any particular individual or religion. But this condemnation or appraisal would not be done with the intention of abusing or flattering others but in the hope that in the process of mutual inquiry and criticism people would acquire a better vision of the truth. And it is of the nature of truth that it need not be and cannot be forced down the throats of others by exploiting their poverty, ignorance, or weak state of health or by using threats or claiming powers from above over the lives of others. It is also of the nature of truth that it brings people together but it is a unity that has to be achieved by a common quest flowering in a common vision.
For ordinary folk like us, the amount of time we have in our lives to actually practice what the Buddha taught is limited. For example, it is generally advised that for people who are nearing the end of their lifespan, it might be preferable to do Pureland chanting. However, we don't really know for sure when we may lose our physical lives. So really, practice needs to be done now and on a regular basis.
From a pragmatic perspective, I question the need to study religions that do not ultimately lead to liberation from the cycle of birth and death. Religions that have elements of False View (e.g. promise everlasting happiness in a paradise, presuppose that salvation is available only to a particular race/community, or teach that there is only one lifetime) do not need to be studied in detail. What benefit may we gain from intimately knowing what is in the scriptures of other religions?
Of course, we may go through a period of spiritual searching and evaluation; and those with better affinities may encounter Buddhism earlier in life. However, once that period of evaluation is over - and something of value and truth has been found - we need to buckle down and concentrate long enough to integrate any given path of cultivation into our lives. This isn't a question of religious dominance or arrogance, but one of how serious we are about liberating ourselves, providing that we do accept what the Buddha taught to be true.
Examining various world religions to look for elements that concord with what the Buddha taught, and then classifying them within a spectrum of which more closely agrees with Buddhist teachings, is an endeavour more for academics. Perhaps, it is an endeavour also suitable for people who are already more accomplished in their practice of the Dharma, or for people who need to understand other religions in order to propagate the Dharma.
For most of us though, aiming for a basic attitude of lovingkindness and non-condemnation toward people from various walks of life suffices.
We do not live in isolation, especially in the information age,we are bombarded
Originally posted by Dawnfirstlight:Thanks.
Wanted to post the exactly same link but I guess realization beat me to it.
Thanks realization !
Originally posted by Weychin:For an average practitioner who first or only wish to strivefor arahantship, perhaps, Way of the Elders is more than adequate,however, for one wish wishes to take the Path of the Bodhisattva,and taken a vow to free sentients beings, an expansive worldviewand understanding is very important.without wisdom, compassion and skillful means it will very difficult tospread the Dharma or even plant the seed of affinity.
In the past, I'd encountered a lady who told me that she had vowed to be a Bodhisattva in order to save sentient beings. However, this lady with her overly zealous attitude managed to cause havoc within her religious organization and soon got thrown out by those who simply couldn't stand her meddling ways any longer (she told me what happened). Her personal life was also not in order.
For this reason, I've never for a moment entertained the thought of following the Bodhisattva path before first gaining an experiential knowing of the Dharma. I don't think I could ferry anyone to the shore, without first ferrying myself!
åŽ»æ¶‰ç•¥å…¶å®ƒå®—æ•™ï¼Œå’ŒåŽ»æ·±å…¥ç ”è¯»å…¶å®ƒå®—æ•™ï¼Œæ˜¯ä¸¤å›žäº‹ã€‚
我ä¸�è®¤ä¸ºæ·±å…¥ç ”è¯»å…¶å®ƒå®—æ•™æ˜¯ä¸€èˆ¬ä½›å¼Ÿå�的任务å�ŠåŠŸè¯¾ã€‚
就说涉略其它宗教å�§ã€‚那也è¦�å¦ä½›å�Žï¼Œæœ‰å¤šä½™çš„时间æ‰�去å�šçš„。如果å¦ä½›çš„功课都没å�šåˆ°ï¼Œå°±åŽ»æ¶‰ç•¥å…¶å®ƒå®—教，那是本末倒置的。
Originally posted by realization:In the past, I'd encountered a lady who told me that she had vowed to be a Bodhisattva in order to save sentient beings. However, this lady with her overly zealous attitude managed to cause havoc within her religious organization and soon got thrown out by those who simply couldn't stand her meddling ways any longer (she told me what happened). Her personal life was also not in order.
For this reason, I've never for a moment entertained the thought of following the Bodhisattva path before first gaining an experiential knowing of the Dharma. I don't think I could ferry anyone to the shore, without first ferrying myself!
remember zenist69 , you are creating the bad karma of speech towards a venerable .If you ask master chinkung nicely ,and it all turn out you are at fault , do you what will happen to you
boils and sores around bodies
skin no longer radiate
bad breath
loss of lots of friendship and opportunity as protector of dharma left you
I am not cursing you , but its stated in the sutra . you should be well aware of it .
If you think MCK is at fault , then purify yourself and realised to help others , instead of spewing heavy karma to something and someone you only from hear from hearsay and conveniently slander him .What we do have karma , no one can run away
Bodhiruci
Awaken Love
Originally posted by bohiruci:remember zenist69 , you are creating the bad karma of speech towards a venerable .If you ask master chinkung nicely ,and it all turn out you are at fault , do you what will happen to you
boils and sores around bodies
skin no longer radiate
bad breath
loss of lots of friendship and opportunity as protector of dharma left you
I am not cursing you , but its stated in the sutra . you should be well aware of it .
If you think MCK is at fault , then purify yourself and realised to help others , instead of spewing heavy karma to something and someone you only from hear from hearsay and conveniently slander him .What we do have karma , no one can run away
Bodhiruci
Awaken Love
è¯¥è¯´çš„éƒ½è¯´äº†ï¼Œä½ å“ªä¸€ç‚¹ä¸�明白？净空法师所说的，有一些是很有问题的。我在这论å�›é‡Œæ��出一点点，是在尽微薄的力é‡�åœ¨ç»´æŠ¤ä½›æ•™ä½›æ³•ã€‚é‚£æ˜¯åœ¨é€ å–„ä¸šä¸�是æ�¶ä¸šã€‚MJK 支æŒ�者去维护邪知邪è§�，替邪知邪è§�狡辩，那是在å�±å®³ä½›æ•™ä½›æ³•ï¼Œé‚£æ‰�æ˜¯åœ¨é€ æ�¶ä¸šï¼�
Originally posted by realization:In the past, I'd encountered a lady who told me that she had vowed to be a Bodhisattva in order to save sentient beings. However, this lady with her overly zealous attitude managed to cause havoc within her religious organization and soon got thrown out by those who simply couldn't stand her meddling ways any longer (she told me what happened). Her personal life was also not in order.
For this reason, I've never for a moment entertained the thought of following the Bodhisattva path before first gaining an experiential knowing of the Dharma. I don't think I could ferry anyone to the shore, without first ferrying myself!
如果我没æ�žé”™çš„è¯�，大乘佛教ä¸�是说ç‰è‡ªå·±æ�žå®šä¸€åˆ‡æ‰�去度别人。。。
Originally posted by Zenist69:如果我没æ�žé”™çš„è¯�，大乘佛教ä¸�是说ç‰è‡ªå·±æ�žå®šä¸€åˆ‡æ‰�去度别人。。。
" Regarding the paths of practice, there are two types: the difficult path and the easy path. One starts the difficult path by invoking the bodhi-mind, and follows up by practicing the bodhisattva path life after life, sacrificing one's self to benefit sentient beings. The traveler on this path relies heavily on the power of his vows to support his work of delivering others life after life. It is a very difficult approach. If his vow-power is not strong enough, the practitioner will frequently withdraw from the path because of frustrations and setbacks. But this path is faster than the easy path, as one will achieve the goal of becoming a Buddha much sooner. The easy path is to rely on rebirth in one of the pure lands that has been created by a Buddha's vow-power, where practitioners can nourish their wisdom. In other words, the practitioners are reborn in a buddha land as ordinary people, but will cultivate wisdom under the facilitating environment there. After they reach the stage of non-retrogression or even the noble stages, they will enter the ordinary world to practice the bodhisattva path to deliver sentient beings. So, this path is more stable, but winding and slow... People without self-confidence or strong aspiration should take the easy path...."
- from "Orthodox Chinese Buddhism" written by Ch'an Master Sheng-yen
For now, I lack strong aspiration and wisdom. Hence, I do not consider starting out on the Bodhisattva path.
Originally posted by Weychin:
Buddhist Attitude To Other Religions
By Professor K. N. Jayatilleke PhD. (Lond)
Courtesy Vesak Lipi
If we consider possible attitudes of one religion towards another in the light of history, they seem to be classifiable under three main headings. The first is that of dominance based on the belief that one's religion alone contains the full truth and that other religions are either completely false or contain so few elements of truth that the sooner they are ousted by whatever means at one's disposal the better it would be for mankind. The next is the attitude of fulfilment which draws its strength from the belief that while other religions contain important elements of truth they find their fullest is the attitude of co-operation which arises out of a conviction that (a) all religions contain aspects of truth and a study of all is necessary to discover the whole truth or (b) that all the higher religions are equally true and that the ostensible differences are due to differences in language rather than in content, and that all these religions are suited to their traditional contexts and (c) that all the higher religions are equally true but some of these religions have a greater attraction for certain types of individuals as against other, the cerebratonics liking a religion with an intellectual appeal, the somatogenics one that stresses action and the viscerotonics, emotion.Now what would be the attitude of Buddhism to other religions? Perhaps the Sandaka Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya seems to supply the answer to this question. In it Ananda describes four types of false religions and four types of unsatisfactory religions, and goes on to define the character of the religion of the Buddha.
Buddha's attitude to other religions is very clearly stated by himself. He was an elitist that argues against all other religions... and clearly states that his teaching is unique from others - not in terms of letting go of gross attachments and emotions, but in terms of letting go of the construct of a self or a Self. This includes the non-Buddhist notion of a Brahman.
Cula-sihanada Sutta (MN 11) -- The Shorter Discourse on the Lion's Roar {M i 63} [Ñanamoli Thera and Bhikkhu Bodhi, trans.]. The Buddha declares that only through practicing in accord with the Dhamma can Awakening be realized. His teaching is distinguished from those of other religions and philosophies through its unique rejection of all doctrines of self. [BB]