One of the leading proponents of "secular Buddhism" would be Toni Packer.
Ms. Packer is one of the dharma-heirs of the late Roshi Philip Kapleau (The author of The Three Pillars of Zen), but gradually dropped away with the cultural baggage and religiosity attached to American buddhism, eventually dropping even the LABEL "buddhism". Check out a book of hers entitled " The Work of This Moment"
I would suggest a female monk I met in a properly working temple in Tienmen City near Wuhan in China, although I suspect that there are many out there easily found. Most modern practicing Buddhist 'clergy' seem to clearly see the seperate nature of their religion and the thinking, as by the way, do Taoists.
The woman I mention only had a few minutes to give me but was clearly and simply right in a similar fashion to the writings of Gandhi.
I did consider booking in for a week just for the occasional opportunity to sit on the edges when she was teaching but they did not allow beer up there, nor did they have a fridge and so sense prevailed.
So, if I'm ever in Tienmen City in China, I'll ask the locals to identify for me the "properly working temple," and talk to the female monks that I find there (who teach sans beer, refrigerated or otherwise).
In the pursuit of something so important a trip to Tienmen is nothing - and the temple is easy to find it is a damn long climb up the steepest steps I have ever attempted, the monk is instantly recognised as she is the 'master'. :-) go for it why don't you
"Secular Buddhism"; in other words, philosophy versus religion. A worthy topic.
I don't know that he wouldn't be happy? He understood the nature of our world hence where I think the four noble truths come from. The basics of his teaching too reveal that he understood a lot about the nature of our world. That being that nothing is lost in the universe, everything changes and there is cause and effect.
I only know this because I was once a long time ago accused of being a Buddhist and so I did research because I knew little about Buddhism.
I would imagine that he, knowing the nature of our world and everything in it, wouldn't be at all surprised or mad by what Buddhism has become.
Oh and what has it become by the way?
I don't known much about Siddhattha Gotama (Buddha). I don't know much about him because nobody does; nothing was written down until about 400 years after his death. However, of the details/ideas that are likely authentically deriving from Buddha, a few of them have some resonance with me. Unfortunately, the further we move away from the gem of his putative ideas, the dirtier this gem gets, the more mired in sediment. I'm not interested in Buddhism + accretion. I'm interested in essential Buddhism, much as I am interested in essential Christianity.
Does that explanation answer your question? I hope so, because it is really the only one that I can provide. :-)
So are you saying you are not interested in the metaphysics of Buddhism but the practical applications of Buddhism via the ideas?
The metaphysics are important, but Buddhist metaphysics have become imbued with crap. I'm not interested in the crap.
Peruse a few of these webpages, and you might get a better idea of where I am coming from:
Theravada Buddhism is your friend, friend. No buddha nature, very little influence from the surrounding cultures. Slightly strict though. But it's teachings are mainly based on what's known to be Buddha teachings. They recognize less boddhisattvas, and are less "religious" then those in other "sects," etc. I'll find some things out for you.
Yes it appears so. Gosh good luck to you. If you can figure out the depth of the four noble truths I would imagine you would be on track.
The trouble with too much conflicting information one can throw the baby out with the bath water.
The changing you speak of is actually found in the Mahaparanibbana Sutra, where the buddhas final teachings were put to paper so to speak. The one you refer to is "sabbe sankhara annica ti" which means " All compounted/conditioned things are impermanent." This teaching reminds us of the futility of clinging/grasping to "things" as they will change...things will rise..exist for a time...then they will vanish. So i must agree with you...the Lion of the Sakyas would NOT be surprised to see the wide range of varied teachings/commentaries/analysis...as he exhorted his followers.."Be a lamp unto yourselves, and work diligently for your own liberation."
Buddha never would have wanted people to venerate his knuckle bones in a temple, or nonsense such as this:
http://www.thegeripackers.com/2012/01/v … ic-of.html
Haha that was too funny. Buddha said if you meet him kill him. So maybe he wouldn't be too worried that they are making money off his supposed tooth. It would be viewed as causing their own suffering.
Except that Buddha said no such thing. That particular koan was formulated by Línjì Yìxuán, who lived approximately 1300 years after Buddha.
I don't think he said it in those exact words no. From memory which is rusty at best, what he was intending to point at was not to worship him.
I understand what the koan meant. :-)
However, Buddha didn't say it, Línjì Yìxuán did. It is something that Buddha probably would have said, though, so I do appreciate its sentiment.
Thanks for reminding me of it.
Interesting forum. Nothing to add, but wish you all luck on your journeys!
by sandra rinck9 years ago
The four noble truths:life is suffering- happiness is only temporary:1. suffering- pain, fear and mental distress2. suffering caused by change- while temporarily happy, changes in this illusion cause suffering ie:...
by RFox7 years ago
1. Buddha is not God.2. Buddha never preached "the word of the God" and never considered himself a prophet. He said repeatedly to his students that he was merely a human being. 3. In teachings the Buddha...
by mischeviousme6 years ago
I am not saying this litterally, I just think that the ideas are very much the same. Buddha saved us from desire and Jesus saved us from our sins. The idea is that the early Hindu and Buddhist teaching, spread...
by Oztinato18 months ago
Why do many atheists accept Bhuddism?Many online atheists openly despise religion but have a warm soft spot for Bhuddism which is also a religion with temples, chants, prayers and reincarnation etc.Why is that?
by BobMonger3 years ago
Can a person consider themselves to be both Christian and Buddhist without compromising themselves?In their purest form the teachings of both Buddha and Christ for virtuous living are identical. The great difference, as...
by dohn1213 years ago
Is Buddhism a religion or a philosophy?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.