(1) Now this, O monks, is the noble truth of pain: birth is painful, old age is painful, sickness is painful, death is painful, sorrow, lamentation, dejection, and despair are painful. Contact with unpleasant things is painful, not getting what one wishes is painful. In short the five “khandas” [forms] of grasping are painful.
(2)
Now this, O monks, is the noble
truth of the cause of pain: that craving which leads to rebirth, combined with
pleasure and lust, finding pleasure here and there, namely, the craving for
passion, the craving for existence, the craving for
non-existence.
(3)
Now this, O monks, is the noble
truth of the cessation of pain: the
cessation without a remainder of that craving, abandonment, forsaking, release,
non-attachment.
(4)
Now this, O monks is the noble
truth of the way that leads to the cessation of pain: this is the noble Eightfold Path,
namely, right views, right intention, right speck right action, right
livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right
concentration…
Buddha’s First Sermon or the Samyutta-nikāya
As in the case of Jainism, Buddhism originated on the Indian sub-continent during the social and cultural upheaval of the sixth century B.C.E., and again, like Jainism, represents a reformist movement within the dominant Hindu religious orientation (as in the case of Jainism, nascent Buddhism emerged in India as a contravention against Vedic Hinduism with its caste system socio-cultural correlates). Thus, the root metaphors or tropes and the fundamental gestalten of the emergent Buddhist religious expression are distinctly Hindu or “Hindu-istic,” even though, ironically, Buddhism never flourished on the Indian sub-continent but took root in China and Southeast Asia as well as Japan where the primary gestalten became tempered through linguistic translation as well as through hybridization/syncretization with antecedent religious orientations connected with the specific regions. Buddhism can be thought of as a missionary religion (that is, its cultus involves the spreading of Buddhist ideas to non-Buddhists); however, using a scheme devised by the late nineteenth century/early twentieth century sociologist of religion, Max Weber, the normative missionary stance of Buddhism is distinct from those of Christianity and Islam because Buddhism’s stance is one categorizable as emissary as opposed to promissory, or commissary, respectively (Weber’s taxonomy for missionary self understanding is based upon the an intensity gradation; that is, emissary missionary activity involves the lowest degree of coercion, promissory a greater degree of coercion, and commissary, the highest degree of coercion) [see Abe 129]. Buddhism in its multivalent forms has become in the contemporary world a demographically popular and trans-cultural religious orientation.
As in the case of the other religious orientations that we have examined thus far in the course, isolating and identifying normative ideas representative of the data set that is classifiable as “Buddhism” is no easy task. In terms of defining that which is normative—isomorphic patterns—evidenced through all the historical and contemporary phenomena classifiable under the rubric “Buddhism,” some have asserted that the “common denominator” evidenced throughout the data-set is some connection with the historico-mythic figure Goatama/Gautama/Siddhartha (who many scholars and many Buddhists believe lived in the sixth century B.C.E). Goatama/Siddhartha has been labeled by many as “THE Buddha,” and his normative statements are recorded in what is known as The Pali Canon (a corpus or collection of authoritative texts written in a Sanskrit-derivative language called Pali). However, even a perfunctory examination of the vast variety of religious orientations, manifested in various geographic locations, reveals that the apparently normative connection with the historico-mythical figure Goatama/Siddhartha may be only a nominal connection. The term Buddha is derivative from the Sanskrit cognate bodhi, which is translatable into English as “enlightenment”: a Buddha is “one who is enlightened.” For many Buddhist sects, Goatama/Siddhartha is not THE Buddha but A Buddha: an enlightened one in a long legacy of enlightened ones (akin to the tīrthankaras in the Jain tradition). Thus, Goatama’s contributions become more eclipsed, more reduced into a background of punctuated enlightenments. However, even though the centrality of the historico-mythical figure Goatama/Siddhartha varies throughout the data set, the centrality of the notion of enlightenment—an enlightenment that translates into measurable ethical consequents or ramifications—permeates the entire data set classifiable as “Buddhist.”
Some also assert that another normative pattern evidenced throughout all
historical and contemporary phenomena includable in the “Buddhism” data set is a
creed-like formulaic profession of faith referred to as triśrana (“the Three Refuges” in English), the triratna (“The Three Jewels” in English), or even the
“Three Treasures,” expressed by every Buddhist monastic or lay, man and
woman: “I go for refuge in the
Buddha; I go for refuge in the Doctrine (dharma); I go for refuge in the
Community (sangha). The Tibetan Buddhists add a forth
refuge/jewel/treasure to the formulaic profession of faith: “I go for refuge in the Lama
(lama is translatable into English as “the superior one”: a religio-political leader in
As in the cases of the other religious orientations and their designative
rubrics, which have been examined thus far, the religious orientations,
including the derivative/determinant cultuses, classifiable under the rubric “Buddhism”
must be treated phenomonologically; that is, the
sui generis “product” constitutive of the data set must
be observed and quantified/qualified in its own terms, and any attempts to
isolate and identify isomorphic patterns must be tempered with a healthy
hermeneutic of suspicion and a scientific-methodological adherence to a
falsification “checks and balances” auto-correction scheme (that is, attempts
must be made to falsify hypotheses by demonstrating anomalies in order to test
the absolute descriptiveness and non-reductiveness of
the hypotheses). When one examines
the data set, one does discover certain isomorphic patterns evidenced throughout
a wide range of the textual-type and cultic/practical “product,” even though
these patterns may include what could be thought of as “standard deviations” in
their specific religiously-governed socio-cultural contexts. What follows is a kind of
“topographical” map of some of the isomorphic patterns evidenced through the
data set classified beneath the rubric “Buddhist” or “Buddhism”: a map that highlights some of the more
salient or conspicuous “features” and “contours” of the data set. But like any map, the re-presentation
that is the map is the as much the result of the exclusion of data as inclusion
of data—maps are made for specific purposes. Therefore, in order to get a more robust
and thorough sense of the data set re-presented through maps, one should
supplement one map with all the other maps purporting to re-present a data set;
therefore, in order to understand Buddhism in a more robust and thoroughly
representative way, one must supplement this digital lecture module with that
re-presented through the Hopfe and Woodward textbook
and all other re-presentations of the subject matter. This is a minimal standard in gaining a
more robust, less reductive “panoramic” vantage point on the subject
matter.
RELIGIOUS COSMOLOGY (AS DEDUCIBLE FROM PRIMARY AND DERIVATIVE IDEAS ENCODED TEXTUALLY AND FROM THE “PRODUCT” CONSTITUTIVE OF THE CULTUS)
Key
Tropes/Metaphors/Motifs/Principles/Doctrines
·
The Four Noble Truths (see Buddha’s First
Sermon in The Pali Canon)
o
The universal existence of suffering
(dukkha)
o
The arising of suffering (samudaya or tanha)
o
The cessation of suffering (nirodha)
o
The Eight-fold Path (mārga or magga in Pali, a
Sanskrit-derivative regional language)
§
Right views
§
Right intention
§
Right speech
§
Right action
§
Right
livelihood
§
Right effort
§
Right
mindfulness
§
Right
concentration
·
The Doctrine of the
·
SAMSARA:
the whirlpool of phenomenal existence, which disorients and impedes
emancipation (mokśa) through enlightenment
(Bhodi or Buddha-hood in some doctrinal as well as sectarian
variants)
·
MAYA:
illusion…the subjective and objective illusions that disorient and
eclipse enlightenment (these illusions involve the experiences, perceptions, and
thinking of self as well as the experiences, perceptions, and thinking of the
empirical, objective world beyond the self)
·
ANATMAN/ANATTA (again, “not-Atman or self”): Self-less-ness or the absence of
individuated self: a metaphysical
principle and correlate doctrine that posits “no-thing-ness” as the most
fundamental cosmological category from which all else is derivative, as opposed
to the Western metaphysical principle of being (this notion of no-thing-ness is
very difficult for those acculturated in primary Western gestalten to grasp)
·
Two types of
meditation:
o Sammatta: intense meditation towards enlightenment
o
Vipassna:
insight meditation—modeled on the Bō Tree
experience of Goatama
FOUR DOCTRINAL SYSTEMS OF BUDDHISM FROM
WHICH THE SECTARIAN VARIANTS, PRACTICED AROUND THE WORLD, WERE DERIVED
(INCLUDING SUI GENERIS METAPHYSICAL NUANCES ON THE ABOVEMENTIONED
PRINCIPLES AND ETHICAL OR PRACTICAL RAMIFICATIONS)
§
Abstention from
killing
§
Abstention from
lying
§
Abstention from
stealing
§
Abstention from sexual
misconduct
§
Abstention from the use of
intoxicants
o
4 Stages of
Sanctification
§
Sotapana:
“one who enters the stream”
§
Sakadagama:
a “once returner”
§
Anagami:
a “never returner”
§
Arahant:
one who has achieved nirvāna:
in Theravāda or Hīnayāna Buddhism, the ultimate horizon is sainthood
or becoming an arhat or “one who has made
it.”
o
Theravāda or Hīnayāna Buddhism is still practiced today by the
Tamil people in
o
A positive philosophy which believes in the
reality of an absolute (bhūtatathatā), the essence of existence (Radakrishnan and Moore 273)
o
Religiously and ethically the absolute is
the dharmakāya (embodied law)
o
The Buddha himself is the incarnation or
personification of the law
o
Accept the teachings of all Buddhas (all the manifestations and embodiments of the
dharma)
o
Aim towards the salvation of all sentient
Buddhas (a soteriological focus: soteriology is a term of Greek origin used in religious
studies contexts: the Greek word
soterios means “salvation” and the Greek word
logos implies, again, “the study of” or
“principles of”)
o
Teach that not only the self is empty but
also the dharma is ultimately empty (all phenomena are
dependent on other phenomena: The
Law of Dependent Co-Origination—all things are inter-related in a stream of
inter-dependency)
o
Regard all activities of a bhodisattva (a sentient being who has resolved to become
a Buddha) as oriented towards salvation:
enlightenment
o
Advocate the ideal of not just becoming an
arhat (a saint), as in Theravāda or Hīnayāna Buddhism, but also of becoming a
Buddha
o
Link samsara and nirvāna:
one should not dwell in either of these fields, but stride a kind of
middle way
o
Because Mahāyāna implies the “great vessel,” many sectarian
forms of this doctrinal system emerged and evolved in different geographical
regions (e.g.,
o
The term zen is derivative from the Japanese
zazen, connoting “a sitting meditation” in
English (the Chinese word Ch’an and the Sanskrit derivative term
dhyāna)
o
The Zen sects are often called the
“intuitive sects”
o
The Zen doctrinal form of Buddhism entails a
religious orientation that stresses enlightenment as an individual
matter
o
In Zen Buddhism, Koans (a Japanese word the can be translated into
English as “case studies”) are the modes of facilitating insights that are
beyond reason
o
In Zen Buddhism, the term Japanese term
sartori is the term to denote
enlightenment
o
The Zen Buddhist doctrinal tradition (as
connected with the dhyāna tradition in Indian and the Ch’an tradition in China) stresses that
nirvāna is immanently and recurrently achievable
when one finds one’s “center” or still-point in the whirlpool of existence (the
other doctrinal traditions emphasize that nirvāna is really an ultimate horizon, like
mokśa in Hinduism)
Again, the
abovementioned survey of some of the isomorphic patterns and certain key
sui generis elements evidenced throughout the
historical and contemporary data set classified as “Buddhism,” is but a
broad-stroke map of an extremely complex historical and contemporary
legacy. The caveat established in
the introduction to this digital lecture module must be recapitulated as a kind
of “afterword”:
any re-presentation of the subject matter—in this case that classified
under the rubric “Buddhist” or “Buddhism”—must be understood as reductive and
thus supplemented with other re-presentations as an antidote to this
reductionism. The fact that in the
contemporary world, the range of worldviews and correlate religio-cultic practices labeled as “Buddhist” or “Buddhism”
involves a significant percentage of the global community’s population, makes the examination of the data set essential
for facilitating any functional level of inter-personal, inter-cultural, and
inter-national dialogue and understanding.
Moreover, an encounter with and attempt at understanding the cosmological
principles and derivative socio-cultural “product” connected with Buddhism
provide a way of putting into a comparative and contrast perspective the
cosmological principles and derivative socio-cultural “products” connected with
non-Buddhist individuals and aggregates.
Abe, Masao. “Buddhism.” Our
Religions. Arvind Sharma, ed.
Harper Collins Publishers, 1993.
Radhakrishnan, Sarvapalli and Charles A. Moore, eds. A Sourcebook in Indian
Philosophy.