Buddhism
I was doing what I do best - reading random blogs - when I came across
Cynically Yours' blog and read it with growing shock.A few readers of the above said blog had asserted that such sightings happen not only in SL (or Buddhists) and exist in other parts of the world with other religions. In fact, the bloger herself has had to clarify that she was not talking just of Sri Lanka. There are many religions in the world which are based on faith. Buddhism, as far as I've understood it, is not in anyway based on faith - it's a philosophy which rationalizes a way of life. Therefore, comparisons to beliefs that are held by religions based on faith are unequal and thereby void.
The Buddha was a human being who developed his mind to a point where he was able to let go of the trappings of life. It was he himself who advised and encouraged those who chose the Buddhist way of life to take his word and use it as a springboard to understand a certain concept instead of blind faith in his word. This is the basis of the importance of living a "Buddhist" life rather than visiting the temple everyday to accumulate "merit."
We Buddhists worship the Buddha, in respect for imparting to us a philosophy for living a certain way of life, and lay flowers/ light lamps at his feet, to remind ourselves of the impermanence of the material aspects of life. We do not worship the Buddha or light lamps merely to accumulate "merit." This is why the claim of seeing "
budu ras emitting from cement statues...[which]...are supposed to be symbolic" (as Cynically Yours has said so well) is so against everything that is Buddhist and is shocking.This brings me to a point which has continued to bother me, for a very long time and more so in the last couple of years, about Buddhists in Sri Lanka. I am not talking of Buddhists elsewhere because I don't know enough about their beliefs and traditions to make such comments.
Section 9 (Ch 2) of the Sri Lankan Constitution reads "
The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana...". Therefore Buddhism is given "the foremost place" in most things including poltical decisions. However, I wonder if Buddhism is given the foremost place in the homes of a lot of Buddhist people?The JHU lobbied, with much support behind them, to have anti-conversion legislation changed to safeguard Buddhism in Sri Lankan society. But what are we trying to safeguard when we say safe guarding "Buddhism"?
One of the strongest memories I have from my childhood is sitting in the Budu Ge at my grandmother's house listening to the soft-spoken intonations of pirith. Even today, the fragrance of incense reminds me of the getting-dressed-for-school time of my teenage years and the memory of my grandmother sitting on her low stool in front of the Buddha Statue taking pansil.
One of the most important advises, among so so many, my grandmother imparted to me, was to take Pansil every morning - not to receive "merit" but to remind myself of what I believe in as I go through the rest of my day.
As years passed, I found that I could not reconcile starting the day with "I shall not take the life of a living being" and eating the flesh and blood of a being whose life was taken by another for my enjoyment/ consumption.What bothers me about Sri Lankan Buddhists is this - whether they expressly take Pansil everyday or not, pansil is the minimum a lay-Buddhist would, or seek to, uphold in their everyday life.
In a country where Buddhism is given the foremost place, in a country where Buddhists are bothered by the fast conversions happening around them, why are we so ready to preserve something, of which the majority of Buddhists cannot seem to uphold the most basic of principles?
Please note here that I am not in anyway advocating policies and legislation advocating "vegetarianism for Buddhists" - for one thing, that is against the very principles of Buddhism (one need not be ordered or told what to do - it must come from within with one's own understanding) and for another, I am not some fanatic trying to force people to accept my ideas..at least not yet.
I am merely asking why it is that we are striving so hard to preserve in society that which we cannot seem to preserve in our very own homes?
Sorry this is so long!
6 comments:
Very valid point. The teachings go on to say, correct your self, before you correct others. A famous priest always says, first you, then your home, then your town/villaga and only then your country. However, many of us fail to see our own mistakes. Faith has to come within you, you cant expect it from a temple or a priest. They will only guide you.
I feel it is important to fight against "Wrongful" conversions etc, but at the same time as you say, look at our selves, our homes, we are living in such an age where we tend to neglect the little things, temples are deserted, priests are busy attending political discussions. Everything seems to be materialized.
It's a rather precarious situation for us Buddhists, and in a time like this such things happen. I've pondered on a few points on one of my posts.
Nice post. You're making a point most extremists and religious fanatics don't seem to get. Would like to say more but no time right now. Later
next time type ot out in point form : )
all religions( and buddhism is one in spite of claims to the contrary ) is based on belief in supernatural. in most religions it is god. in buddhism it is the karmic cycle.
basic problem all religions face is they are expected to differentiate good from bad and explain what happens after death ( and say something more comforting other than 'nothing' happens) . they can only do that by appealing to supernatural.
that is why we ( unless we are through going atheists and materialists who think there is no difference between good or evil and that death is death) should not feel superior to ppl who exhibit 'blind' faith . all religions are 'blind' by definition.
I apologize if my blog/ writing came out sounding superior to religions (based on faith) - that was completely unintended!
What Sittingnut says is true to the extent that belief in the karmic cycle would mean that Buddhism too is based on some sort of faith system - altho the fundamentalists out there would vehemently disagree on that! ;o)
However, Buddhism can also be lived as a philosophy only (as a moral code) devoid of belief in karma, sin, merit and visiting the temple.
At the end of the day, it comes down to a personal choice of whether one chooses to believe in it as a religion or live it as philosophy.
trouble with buddhism as philosophy argument is philosophy's logic when divorced from karmic cycle becomes rather weak.
to take one example, if life is suffering. and there is no life after death. what is the way leading to end of suffering ? noble eightfold path or suicide?
Post a Comment