by Russell Grigg

On 14th May 2012, the Dalai Lama was awarded the Templeton Prize of 1.1 million.1 So what is the Templeton Prize, and why did the Dalai Lama get it?

The Templeton Prize was established in 1972 by American-born British billionaire Sir John Marks Templeton (19122008), who later set up the Templeton Foundation to fund the prize in perpetuity. This came to our attention a decade ago when we learned that the Templeton Foundation was paying Bible colleges around the world to run courses that taught theistic evolution. See Evangelical colleges paid to teach evolution. At that time the Templeton website said its Prize was awarded annually to

a living individual who has shown extraordinary originality advancing the worlds understanding of God and/or spirituality.2

The Prize is intended to help people see the infinity of the Universal Spirit still creating the galaxies and all living things and the variety of ways in which the Creator is revealing himself to different people. We hope all religions may become more dynamic and inspirational.3

After Sir Johns death, the revised Templeton website read:

The Prize celebrates no particular faith tradition or notion of God, but rather the quest for progress in humanitys efforts to comprehend the many and diverse manifestations of the Divine.4

As such, the website announces that its Prize has been awarded to representatives of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism, but also others as well, i.e. to those who do not claim adherence to any of these religions. See Templeton Prize goes to evolutionist professor, and Templeton Prize goes to pantheist Darwinist.

The Templeton website originally said: The Templeton Prize does not encourage syncretism . However, the awarding of the Prize this year would seem to be the epitome of this. The Dalai Lama is a Buddhist atheist (he says hes Buddhist, and that he doesnt believe in God; hence Buddhist atheist). The website says he

has vigorously focused on the connections between the investigative traditions of science and Buddhism as a way to better understand and advance what both disciplines might offer the world.5

Nevertheless the presentation ceremony was held in St Pauls Cathedral, London. It was preceded by a period of chanting by eight Buddhist monks, before he was welcomed by the Canon of St Pauls, with the Bishop of London and the Archbishop of Canterbury in support.

The 14th Dalai Lama6 is a man by the name of Tenzin Gyatso (n Lhamo Dondrub, 1935 ). Since 1950, he has been the leader of the dominant sect of Tibetan Buddhists, who believe him to be a reincarnation of an ancient Buddhist leader, the Bodhisattva of Compassion.7 However, concerning himself, the Dalai Lama says: I am just a human being.8

In 1950, Communist China took over Tibet. After the Communists brutally crushed a Tibetan uprising in 1959, the Dalai Lama fled to India. He was awarded the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his nonviolent campaign over nearly 40 years to end Chinas domination of his homeland.9 He is the first Dalai Lama to have come into full contact with Western science and technology.

He has written some 70 books in which he reiterates that as a Buddhist he does not believe in a transcendent Creator God who is the uncaused first cause, nor that Jesus Christ was this God incarnate. He thus does not believe that mankind is in rebellion against God and hence under divine Judgment from which we need a Saviour, or that Jesus Christ is that Saviour. He tells us: My own worldview is grounded in the philosophy and teachings of Buddhism, which arose within the intellectual milieu of ancient India.10,11

Buddhism began as the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama, a Hindu prince of the Sakya tribe, born in northern India (now Nepal), who lived and died 25 centuries ago. At the age of 29, he ventured beyond the protective walls of the palace and saw for the first time a frail old man, a sick person, a dead body, and an ascetic. All this led him to abandon his kingly birthright, leave the palace and his wife of 13 years and his newborn son, and give himself to extreme asceticism, which almost cost him his life. He then chose a middle path that avoided both self-mortification and self-indulgence, and which culminated for him in enlightenment through meditation. He became known as Sakyamuni Buddhameaning the sage of the Sakyas, or just the Buddha, meaning the enlightened one.

This does not mean he was a god, or a messenger/prophet from God. The Buddhist website buddhanet.net states: A Buddha is not a god/God. The relationship between a Buddha and his disciples and followers is that of a teacher and student.12 Buddhism is thus a philosophy of life, the product of human thought, not a revelation from God or about God. Buddhist doctrine is known as the Dharma.

The Buddhas enlightenment included the Four Noble Truths. These are:

The concept of karma as a universal Law of Cause and Effect pervades Buddhism. Buddhist Venerable Master Hsing Yun explains:

All intentional acts of body, speech, and mind produce karmic retribution that will inevitably occur. it is karma that keeps sentient beings trapped in the cycle of birth and death. Good karma [resulting from deeds which help other sentient beings] leads to rebirth as a human being or a heavenly being. On the other hand, bad karma is any action that harms or causes suffering to self or others. Very bad acts produce karma that leads to rebirth in one of the three lower realms of existence (the realms of hell, hungry ghosts, and animals).14,15

And the Dalai Lama says:

In Buddhism, this karmic causality is seen as a fundamental natural process and not as any kind of divine mechanism or a working out of a preordained design.16

Karma generated in this life may arrive in this life, or in the next life, or in some life beyond the next life when the right conditions arise. Karmic causes and effects do not disappear, they cannot be forgiven, there are no exceptions, and bad karma and good karma cannot cancel each other out. One life is not enough to pay for all of ones karma. Reincarnation is thus an ongoing process of birth, death, and rebirth with the prospect that if you kill a chicken in this life, you face being reborn as a chicken in your next life (see also Reincarnation vs Creation). Strict Buddhism calls for vegetarianism, because eating meat involves killing an animal. Westerners might wonder whether another reason could be the possibility that a frozen chicken in a supermarket just might be Grandpa!

For Buddhists, the only means of escaping from this cycle is to achieve nirvana. According to Buddhist authorities, this is not a heaven or paradise, but more like total oblivion.

In Buddhism, it refers to the absolute extinction of individual existence, or of all afflictions and desires; it is the state of liberation, beyond birth and death. It is also the final goal of Buddhism.17

Achieving nirvana is through enlightenment, which means that you become a buddha, i.e. someone who has been purified of karma. This is only possible from the human realm. No saviour exists, not even Buddha. Each person must get there solely by their own effort.

Buddha rejected the existence of all gods and spiritual beings. Buddhism thus denies the Christian concept of a Supreme Spiritual Being outside of His creation who brought all things into existence. Buddhists begin with the presupposition that there is no Divine Authority to direct their conduct or to whom they are accountable now or in any future life.

Christianitys presupposition is that God does exist as a Personal, Intelligent, Moral Being. We believe that He is able to communicate truth to us and has done so in His Word, which we call the Holy Bible. In this, God tells us not only that He created all things, but that He did so through his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ (Colossians 1:16). And concerning our accountability to God, we are assured that not only is it appointed unto man to die only once, but after that comes judgment (Hebrews 9:27).

The Dalai Lama writes:

In Buddhism there is no recognition of something like the soul which is unique to humans. From the perspective of consciousness, the difference between humans and animals is a matter of degree and not of kind.18

Christians believe that because we are all made in the image of God, we have a spiritual dimension, i.e. a capacity for holding spiritual communion with God through prayer, praise, and worship. Furthermore this is a permanent essence or immortal part of man that survives death; it is sometimes called the soul (Matthew 10:28); cf. Revelation 6:9 where the martyred disembodied dead in heaven are called souls. And Jesus said: For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul (Mark 8:36).

These aspects of no God and no soul are similar to atheist/evolutionist Richard Dawkins statement in The God Delusion:

An atheist is somebody who believes there is nothing beyond the natural, physical world, no supernatural creative intelligence lurking behind the observable universe, no soul that outlasts the body and no miraclesexcept in the sense of natural phenomena that we dont yet understand.19

To the Western mind, the doctrine of no soul appears to undermine the Buddhist concept of reincarnationif a person has no soul, what part of them gets reborn? And without a soul how can anyone be held accountable for karma and its alleged consequences? However, to a Buddhist, religion is a set of practices not a set of answers. Relating harmoniously to everyone and everything is more important than the reason why things are or are not.

Sin, as rebellion against a holy God, or as transgression of divine law(s), is not recognized in Buddhism. Buddhists have many numerical lists of things to do or not do, but these tend to be regarded more as counsel than as commandments. For example, one of Buddhas Five Precepts for laymen is Do not take intoxicants.20 Thus under Buddhist philosophy, if you do drink alcohol or use drugs, you are just making it harder for yourself to become enlightened. Equally, sexual misconduct is not a sin in the sense of breaking a God-given commandment.

Christianity teaches that sin is rebellion against the authority of God over us, and against His standards for our behaviour. As such sin is an affront to the holiness of God who made us in His image (Genesis 1:27).21 (See Why did God impose the death penalty for sin? and Dawkins dilemma: How God forgives sin). Jesus said that the work of the Holy Spirit is to convict the world of sin, and of righteousness and of judgment (John 16:8).

In Buddhism, there is no Saviour. The only salvation is through self-help, following the Noble Eightfold Path until you become a buddha, i.e. you pass out of the wheel of life and enter nirvana. Buddhists deny the deity of Jesus Christ, and hence that His death on the cross was the perfect sacrifice and atonement for our sins.

The Gospel, as defined in 1 Corinthians 15:14, is that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. The Bible says that by His resurrection from the dead Christ was declared to be the Son of God in power (Romans 1:4). The Lord Jesus Christ is thus the Saviour whom God has provided and whom we all need. As the Bible says: In this is love, not that we have loved God but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins (1 John 4:10).

(a) Of Life

In his book The Universe in a Single Atom the Dalai Lama devotes the whole of Chapter Five to discussing the theory of evolution. As this concept is not a threat to any Buddhist scriptures, nor yet to the Buddhist religion, and certainly not to Buddhist atheism, his conclusions are very pertinent and obviously he cannot be accused of having a creationist bias.

He notes that Darwinian evolution does not explain the origin of life, that it is not even a testable theory by Karl Poppers definition (see creation.com/its-not-science), that survival of the fittest is a tautology, that the struggle for existence through aggression and competition does not explain altruism and compassion, and that the Darwinian account of the origin of life does not explain the origin of sentience (i.e. conscious beings who have the capacity to experience pain and pleasure).22

Not surprisingly, because he does not believe in Creation, the Dalai Lama does not have an adequate answer to any of the problems he highlights in Darwinism.

(b) Of the Universe

Buddhism provides no historical information about the beginning of thingsthe universe, the world, life, us. Despite their obsession with the karmic law of cause and effect, the issue of a First Cause is cheerfully and robustly ignored. In his book, The Universe in a Single Atom, the Dalai Lama writes:

From the Buddhist perspective, the idea that there is a single definite beginning is highly problematical. If there were such an absolute beginning, logically speaking, this leaves only two options. One is theism, which proposes that the universe is created by an intelligence that is totally transcendent, and therefore outside the laws of cause and effect. The second option is that the universe came into being from no cause at all. Buddhism rejects both these options.23

He notes the promotion of the big bang as an attempt by some to explain the origin of the universe, but finds the latter unconvincing. He says:

I am left with questions, serious ones: What existed before the big bang? Where did the big bang come from? What caused it? Why has our planet evolved to support life? What is the relationship between the cosmos and the beings that have evolved within it?24

He concludes: [I]n Buddhism the universe is seen as infinite and beginningless 25 He also points out that the Buddha himself never directly answered questions put to him about the origin of the universe. And he says that

Interpretations of the meaning of the Buddhas refusal to answer these questions directly vary. One view is that the Buddha refused to answer because these metaphysical questions do not directly pertain to liberation [i.e. release into nirvana]. Another view is that insofar as the questions were framed on the presupposition of the intrinsic reality of things, and not on dependent origination, responding would have led to a deeper entrenchment in the belief in solid, inherent existence.26

This mention of the reality of things highlights the Buddhist doctrine that reality is an illusion, and that all things and experiences are changeable and impermanent. As Buddhist Venerable Master Hsing Hun explains:

In Buddhism it is said that existence relies on emptiness, which means that all phenomena have no independent nature. Since all things are interconnected, not one of them can be said to have a permanent, substantial existence. Ultimately, the nature of all things is empty; their existence relies on emptiness.27

Presumably such a thought experiment does not preclude Buddhists from looking both ways before crossing a busy street. The leading Indian-born Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias (1946 ) says:

Yes, even in India we look both ways before we cross the street because it is either me or the bus, not both of us!28

Concerning reality, Christians believe in a God who not only is there, but who also has given us accurate information about the past. As Christian scholar and theologian Dr Francis Schaeffer has said: He [God] has spoken first about Himself, not exhaustively but truly; and second, He has spoken about history and about the cosmos, not exhaustively but truly.29 Our record of this is the Bible.

What then do Buddhism and Christianity say about the three major concerns that human beings have concerning life? Consider:

BUDDHISM

CHRISTIANITY

God

Unknowable

Revealed in the Bible

Soul

None

Immortal part of man

Sin

Replaced by the Law of Karma

Rebellion against God

Saviour

Only ones own self

Jesus Christ, the one and only

Salvation

Through enlightenment

Through repentance and faith in Christs death and resurrection

Goal

Achieving an unconscious nirvana

To live forever with Christ in Heaven

Buddhists do not acknowledge that humans are in rebellion against a holy God. They are accountable only to themselves and so only have themselves to save themselves by their own works. The result of this mindset is that they have no basis for forgiveness for shameful deeds done in the past, only a wretched proactive inescapable karma.

The good news for Christians (and indeed for everybody) is that there is an answer to the sin problem. It is called salvation. We believe that God loves us (Romans 5:8), and because He loves us, He sent his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, who had no sin (Hebrews 4:15), to pay the penalty for our sins by His death on the cross. In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins (Ephesians 1:7). Because Christ was sinless, He could die for our sins, and because He was and is God, His death is effective for all who avail themselves of it by repentance and faith in what He has done.

The Bible says: If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). Notice the word justGod can justly forgive us our sins because Christ has paid the penalty for them. And it is only on the grounds of Christs death on our behalf that God can and does deal mercifully with us. The Bible also says: For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast (Ephesians 2:89).

We have already seen that Buddhism offers no help for the present. Their cure for suffering is the elimination of desire, but counteracting this cure is the doctrine of karma. There is also the problem of self-refutation: there must be a desire to eliminate desire! Christianity teaches that the greatest problem we all have is sin, and a primary meaning of this is missing the mark or falling short (meaning falling short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23)).30 Buddhists may think of this only in terms of their ongoing Law of Cause and Effect, or karma, but the Bible calls it sin.

The good news of the Gospel is that Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for usfor it is written, Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree (Galatians 3:13). While this is referring to our transgression against Gods Law, Christ can save Buddhists not only from this, but also from their own self-imposed Law of Karma because as far as the east is from the west, so far does He remove our transgressions from us (Psalm 103:12).

When Christ rose from the dead, He was resurrected as Himself, not reincarnated as somebody else. As such, He dwells in the hearts of believers through faith (Ephesians 3:17). The Bible calls this being born again (John 3:3), and the especially good news for Buddhists is that it only needs to happen once. Further good news is that the same almighty power of God that raised Christ from the dead is available to Christians today for life and service (Ephesians 1:1820). But the corresponding bad news for the unsaved is that we only die once, and after that comes judgment (Hebrews 9:27)no second chances in a reincarnated future life.

For Buddhists, the future means innumerable rebirths, with the forlorn hope of perhaps achieving nirvanasomething like total annihilationat absolute best. Not much of a future!

For Christians, the future means hopea hope that is certain. We have the wonderful promise that after death we will be united with our God and Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, to spend eternity with Him in Heaven. The Word of God, the Bible, referring to those who have died as those who have fallen asleep, says:

But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord (1 Thessalonians 4:1318).

Thus, Christs atoning death and His resurrection not only provide cleansing from shame in the past, they also give power in the present, and certain hope for the future.

Buddhism produces a strong national and ethnic identity which is one of the greatest obstacles to evangelism. In the minds of many Asians, to be Thai, Burmese, Tibetan etc. is to be Buddhist. Thus, as in all evangelism, one must build bridges, i.e. be a caring friend who forms trusting relationships. We also need to bear in mind that it will be much easier for converts to stand if the whole family comes to Christ rather than just individuals.

Dr Alex Smith, OMF International missionary with many years experience relating to missionary evangelism of Buddhists advises:31

Such as the universe, God, Christ, man, sin, grace, salvation, life, Heaven. These terms all mean something different to Buddhists from what they mean to Christians.

Good communication depends on what has been heard and understood rather than on what has been said. So conversational exchange involving listening and feedback to clarify meaning are essential. E.g. eternal life (John 3:16) may be understood by Buddhists to mean eternal suffering because to them life is suffering and they make every effort to escape the inevitable cycle of ongoing life.

The Holy Spirit is the primary agent for producing conviction and conversion. The powerful Word of God proclaimed, clearly understood, and received by faith can transform lives, families, societies, and whole people groups.

Pray, earn the right to speak, relate in true Christian love and genuine affection, avoid criticism and pressure, believe that God is working.

Some different approaches to sharing the Gospel with Buddhists suggested by Dr Smith include:32

The first book in the Bible, Genesis, relates how suffering and death entered the world. God originally created a perfect sinless world, in which there was no violence, disease, suffering, or death (Genesis 1:31). However, the first humans whom God created, Adam and Eve, rejected Gods authority over them, thereby incurring Gods righteous judgment. This judgment included suffering as well as death. Thus Genesis 3:1619 reads:

To the woman He said, I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you. And to Adam He said, Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, You shall not eat of it, cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life, thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.

As well as judging sin with death, God also withdrew some of His sustaining power. Everything is thus running down because of sin (in bondage to decay, Romans 8:1922).34 God has given us a taste of life without Himwe now live in a world of violence, disease, suffering, and deathand the whole cosmos was affected, including animals eating each other, and thorns. Christians are not immune from these, and the Gospel does not promise we shall be delivered from suffering. Indeed, God Himself, in the person of Jesus Christ, went through pain, suffering and death to redeem us from eternal suffering. Rather, God has purposes to achieve in our life through suffering. And for this, we as Christians now have Christs presence within us (John 1:12) to help us.

In particular: Suffering can perfect us, or make us mature in the image of Christ (Romans 5:35; Hebrews 5:79). Suffering can help us to know Christ who was a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief (Isaiah 53:3). Suffering can make us more able to comfort others who suffer. (2 Corinthians 1:34). Suffering prepares us for glory in heaven (Romans 8:18; 2 Corinthians 4:17). And as Christians we should especially note Philippians 1:29: For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in Him but also suffer for His sake.

Comments closed

Comments closed

Read more here:
Buddhism - creation.com

Buddhism is one of the most important Asian spiritual traditions. During itsroughly 2.5 millennia of history, Buddhism has shown a flexible approach, adapting itself to different conditions and local ideas while maintaining its core teachings. As a result of its wide geographical expansion, coupled with its tolerant spirit, Buddhism today encompasses a number of different traditions, beliefs, and practices.

During the last decades, Buddhism has also gained a significant presence outside Asia.With the number of adherents estimated to be almost 400 million people, Buddhism in our day has expanded worldwide, and it is no longer culturally specific. For many centuries, this tradition has been a powerful force in Asia, which has touched nearly every aspect of the eastern world: arts, morals, lore, mythology, social institutions, etc. Today, Buddhism influences these same areas outside of Asia, as well.

The origin of Buddhism points to one man, Siddhartha Gautama, the historical Buddha, who was born in Lumbini (in present-day Nepal) during the 5th century BCE. Rather than the founder of a new religion, Siddhartha Gautama was the founder and leader of a sect of wanderer ascetics (Sramanas), one of many sects that existed at that time all over India. This sect came to be known as Sanghato distinguish it from other similar communities.

The Sramanas movement, which originated in the culture of world renunciation that emerged in India from about the 7th century BCE, was the common origin of many religious and philosophical traditions in India, including the Charvaka school, Buddhism, and its sister religion, Jainism. The Sramanas were renunciants who rejected the Vedic teachings, which was the traditional religious order in India, and renounced conventional society.

Siddhartha Gautama lived during a time of profound social changes in India. The authority of the Vedic religion was being challenged by a number of new religious and philosophical views. This religion had been developed by a nomadic society roughly a millennium before Siddharthas time, and it gradually gained hegemony over most of north India, especially in the Gangetic plain. But things were different in the 5th BCE, as society was no longer nomadic: agrarian settlements had replaced the old nomad caravans and evolved into villages, then into towns and finally into cities. Under the new urban context, a considerable sector of Indian society was no longer satisfied with the old Vedic faith. Siddhartha Gautama was one of the many critics of the religious establishment.

In some religions, sin is the origin of human suffering. In Buddhism there is no sin; the root cause of human suffering is avidy ignorance.

After Siddhartha Gautama passed away, the community he founded slowly evolved into a religion-like movement and the teachings of Siddhartha became the basis of Buddhism. The historical evidence suggests that Buddhism had a humble beginning. Apparently, it was a relatively minor tradition in India, and some scholars have proposed that the impact of the Buddha in his own day was relatively limited due to the scarcity of written documents, inscriptions, and archaeological evidence from that time.

By the 3rd century BCE, the picture we have of Buddhism is very different. The Mauryan Indian emperor Ashoka the Great (304232 BCE), who ruled from 268 to 232 BCE, turned Buddhism into the state religion of India. He provided a favourable social and political climate for the acceptance of Buddhist ideas, encouraged Buddhist missionary activity, and even generated among Buddhist monks certain expectations of patronage and influence on the machinery of political decision making. Archaeological evidence for Buddhism between the death of the Buddha and the time of Ashoka is scarce; after the time of Ashoka it is abundant.

There are many stories about disagreements among the Buddha's disciples during his lifetime and also accounts about disputes among his followers during the First Buddhist Council held soon after the Buddhas death, suggesting that dissent was present in the Buddhist community from an early stage. After the death of the Buddha, those who followed his teachings had formed settled communities in different locations. Language differences, doctrinal disagreements, the influence of non-Buddhist schools, loyalties to specific teachers, and the absence of a recognized overall authority or unifying organizational structure are just some examples of factors that contributed to sectarian fragmentation.

About a century after the death of Buddha, during the Second Buddhist Council, we find the first major schism ever recorded in Buddhism: The Mahasanghika school. Many different schools of Buddhism had developed at that time. Buddhist tradition speaks about 18 schools of early Buddhism, although we know that there were more than that, probably around 25. A Buddhist school named Sthaviravada (in Sanskrit school of the elders) was the most powerful of the early schools of Buddhism. Traditionally, it is held that the Mahasanghika school came into existence as a result of a dispute over monastic practice. They also seem to have emphasized the supramundane nature of the Buddha, so they were accused of preaching that the Buddha had the attributes of a god. As a result of the conflict over monastic discipline, coupled with their controversial views on the nature of the Buddha, the Mahasanghikas were expelled, thus forming two separate Buddhist lines: the Sthaviravada and the Mahasanghika.

During the course of several centuries, both the Sthaviravada and the Mahasanghika schools underwent many transformations, originating different schools. The Theravada school, which still lives in our day, emerged from the Sthaviravada line, and is the dominant form of Buddhism in Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. The Mahasanghika school eventually disappeared as an ordination tradition.

During the 1st century CE, while the oldest Buddhist groups were growing in south and south-east Asia, a new Buddhist school named Mahayana (Great Vehicle) originated in northern India. This school had a more adaptable approach and was open to doctrinal innovations. Mahayama Buddhism is today the dominant form of Buddhism in Nepal, Tibet, China, Japan, Mongolia, Korea, and Vietnam.

During the time of Ashokas reign, trade routes were opened through southern India. Some of the merchants using these roads were Buddhists who took their religion with them. Buddhist monks also used these roads for missionary activity. Buddhism entered Sri Lanka during this time. A Buddhist chronicle known as the Mahavamsa claims that the ruler of Sri Lanka, Devanampiya Tissa, was converted to Buddhism by Mahinda, Ashokas son, who was a Buddhist missionary, and Buddhism became associated with Sri Lankas kingship: The tight relationship between the Buddhist community and Lankans rulers was sustained for more than two millennia until the dethroning of the last Lankan king by the British in 1815 CE.

After reaching Sri Lanka, Buddhism crossed the sea into Myanmar (Burma): Despite the fact that some Burmese accounts say that the Buddha himself converted the inhabitants of Lower and Upper Myanmar, historical evidence suggests otherwise. Buddhism co-existed in Myanmar with other traditions such as Brahmanism and various locals animists cults. The records of a Chinese Buddhist pilgrim named Xuanzang (Hsan-tsang, 602-664 CE) state that in the ancient city of Pyu (the capital of the Kingdom of Sri Ksetra, present day Myanmar), a number of early Buddhist schools were active. After Myanmar, Buddhism travelled into Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Laos, around 200 CE. The presence of Buddhism in Indonesia and the Malay peninsula is supported by archaeological records from about the 5th century CE.

While Buddhism was flourishing all over the rest of Asia, its importance in India gradually diminished. Two important factors contributed to this process: a number of Muslim invasions, and the advancement of Hinduism, which incorporated the Buddha as part of the pantheon of endless gods; he came to be regarded as one of the many manifestations of the god Vishnu. In the end, the Buddha was swallowed up by the realm of Hindu gods, his importance diminished, and in the very land where it was born, Buddhism dwindled to be practiced by very few.

Buddhism entered China during the Han dynasty (206 BCE-220 CE): The first Buddhist missionaries accompanied merchant caravans that travelled using the Silk Road, probably during the 1st century BCE. The majority of these missionaries belonged to the Mahayana school.

The initial stage of Buddhism is China was not very promising. Chinese culture had a long-established intellectual and religious tradition and a strong sense of cultural superiority that did not help the reception of Buddhist ideas. Many of the Buddhist ways were considered alien by the Chinese and even contrary to the Confucian ideals that dominated the ruling aristocracy. The monastic order received a serious set of critiques: It was considered unproductive and therefore was seen as placing an unnecessary economic burden on the population, and the independence from secular authority emphasized by the monks was seen as an attempt to undermine the traditional authority of the emperor.

Despite its difficult beginning, Buddhism managed to build a solid presence in China towards the fall of the Han dynasty on 220 CE, and its growth accelerated during the time of disunion and political chaos that dominated China during the Six Dynasties period (220-589 CE). The collapse of the imperial order made many Chinese skeptical about the Confucian ideologies and more open to foreign ideas. Also, the universal spirit of Buddhist teachings made it attractive to many non-Chinese ruler in the north who were looking to legitimate political power. Eventually, Buddhism in China grew strong, deeply influencing virtually every aspect of its culture.

From China, Buddhism entered Korea in 372 CE, during the reign of King Sosurim, the ruler of the Kingdom of Koguryo, or so it is stated in official records. There is archaeological evidence that suggests that Buddhism was known in Korea from an earlier time.

The official introduction of Buddhism in Tibet (according to Tibetan records) took place during the reign of the first Tibetan emperor Srong btsan sgam po (Songtsen gampo, 617-649/650 CE), although we know that the proto-Tibetan people had been in touch with Buddhism from an earlier time, through Buddhist merchants and missionaries. Buddhism grew powerful in Tibet, absorbing the local pre-Buddhist Tibetan religions. Caught between China and India, Tibet received monks from both sides and tension between Chinese and Indian Buddhist practice and ideology turned out to be inevitable. From 792 to 794 CE a number of debates were held in the Bsam yas monastery between Chinese and Indian Buddhists. The debate was decided in favour of the Indians: Buddhists translations from Chinese sources were abandoned and the Indian Buddhist influence became predominant.

The Buddha was not concerned with satisfying human curiosity related to metaphysical speculations. Topics like the existence of god, the afterlife, or creation stories were ignored by him. During the centuries, Buddhism has evolved into different branches, and many of them have incorporated a number of diverse metaphysical systems, deities, astrology and other elements that the Buddha did not consider. In spite of this diversity, Buddhism has a relative unity and stability in its moral code.

The most important teaching of the Buddha is known as The Four Noble Truths, which is shared with varying adjustments by all Buddhist schools. In general, the Four Noble Truths are explained as follows:

In some religions, sin is the origin of human suffering. In Buddhism there is no sin; the root cause of human suffering is avidy ignorance. In the entrance area of some Buddhist monasteries, sometimes the images of four scary-looking deities are displayed, the four protectors whose purpose is to scare away the ignorance of those who enter.

Buddhism does not require faith or belief. If faith can be understood as believing something which is unsupported by evidence, and ignorance is overcome by understanding, then faith is not enough to overcome ignorance and therefore suffering. And belief, as understood by other religions, is not necessary in Buddhism:

The question of belief arises when there is no seeing - seeing in every sense of the word. The moment you see, the question of belief disappears. If I tell you that I have a gem hidden in the folded palm of my hand, the question of belief arises because you do not see it yourself. But if I unclench my fist and show you the gem, then you see it for yourself, and the question of belief does not arise. So the phrase in ancient Buddhist texts reads 'Realizing, as one sees a gem in the palm'

(Rahula W., p.9)

In its most basic form, Buddhism does not include the concept of a god. The existence of god is neither confirmed, nor denied; it is a non-theistic system. The Buddha is seen as an extraordinary man, not a deity. Some Buddhist schools have incorporated supernatural entities into their traditions, but even in these cases, the role of human choice and responsibility remains supreme, far above the deeds of the supernatural.

In some Chinese and Japanese Buddhist monasteries, they go even further by performing a curious exercise: The monks are requested to think that the Buddha did not even existed. There is a good reason for this: the core of Buddhism is not the Buddha, but his teachings or dharma. It is said that those who wish to understand Buddhism and are interested in the Buddha are as mistaken as a person who wishes to study mathematics by studying the life ofPythagorasor Newton. By imagining the Buddha never existed, they avoid focusing on the idol so that they can embrace the ideal.

Read this article:
Buddhism - Ancient History Encyclopedia

By: Express News Service | Bhopal | Published:August 19, 2017 6:02 am External Affairs minister Sushma Swaraj addresses India-ASEAN Youth Summit in Bhopal on Friday. PTI photo

External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj on Thursday said Buddhism and Ramayana connect members of Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) alliance, including Muslim-dominated Indonesia, to India.

Recalling her trip to Indonesia last year, Swaraj said the country is full of motifs from Ramayana and Mahabharata. She said every major road junction depicts the famous image from Gita of Arjun bowing before Krishna, the charioteer.

Speaking at the valedictory function of Indo-ASEAN Youth Summit here, Swaraj quoted Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and said that the former Prime Minister was surprised to find Muslim sculptors making what looked like idols of Hanuman during his visit to Indonesia as the External Affairs minister.

She said Vajpayees curiosity got better of him and he asked the sculptor what he was making. But you are a Muslim, he told the sculptor, only to be told, Hamne mazhab badla hai purkhe nahi (we have changed our religion, not ancestors), she said.

She asked Indian participants of the summit to visit these countries and see how India and these countries were embracing each other.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

Read more here:
Buddhism, Ramayana connect ASEAN to India, says Sushma Swaraj - The Indian Express

Buddhism ( or ) is a religion[note 1] and dharma that encompasses a variety of traditions, beliefs and spiritual practices largely based on teachings attributed to the Buddha. Buddhism originated in Ancient India sometime between the 6th and 4th centuries BCE, from where it spread through much of Asia, whereafter it declined in India during the Middle Ages. Two major extant branches of Buddhism are generally recognized by scholars: Theravada (Pali: "The School of the Elders") and Mahayana (Sanskrit: "The Great Vehicle"). Buddhism is the world's fourth-largest religion, with over 500 million followers or 7% of the global population, known as Buddhists.[web 1][4]

Buddhist schools vary on the exact nature of the path to liberation, the importance and canonicity of various teachings and scriptures, and especially their respective practices. Practices of Buddhism include taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha, study of scriptures, observance of moral precepts, renunciation of craving and attachment, the practice of meditation (including calm and insight), the cultivation of wisdom, loving-kindness and compassion, the Mahayana practice of bodhicitta and the Vajrayana practices of generation stage and completion stage.

In Theravada the ultimate goal is the cessation of the kleshas and the attainment of the sublime state of Nirvana, achieved by practicing the Noble Eightfold Path (also known as the Middle Way), thus escaping what is seen as a cycle of suffering and rebirth. Theravada has a widespread following in Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia.

Mahayana, which includes the traditions of Pure Land, Zen, Nichiren Buddhism, Shingon and Tiantai (Tendai), is found throughout East Asia. Rather than Nirvana, Mahayana instead aspires to Buddhahood via the bodhisattva path,[note 2] a state wherein one remains in the cycle of rebirth to help other beings reach awakening.

Vajrayana, a body of teachings attributed to Indian siddhas, may be viewed as a third branch or merely a part of Mahayana. Tibetan Buddhism, which preserves the Vajrayana teachings of eighth century India,[9] is practiced in regions surrounding the Himalayas, Mongolia[10] and Kalmykia.[11] Tibetan Buddhism aspires to Buddhahood or rainbow body.[12]

Contents

Buddhism is an Indian religion[13] attributed to the teachings of the Buddha, supposedly born Siddhrtha Gautama, and also known as the Tathagata ("thus-gone") and Sakyamuni ("sage of the Sakyas"). The details of Buddha's life are mentioned in many early Buddhist texts but are inconsistent, and his social background and life details are difficult to prove, the precise dates uncertain.[note 3]

The evidence of the early texts suggests that he was born as Siddhrtha Gautama in Lumbini and grew up in Kapilavasthu,[note 4] a town in the plains region of the modern Nepal-India border, and that he spent his life in what is now modern Bihar[note 5] and Uttar Pradesh. Some hagiographic legends state that his father was a king named Suddhodana, his mother was queen Maya, and he was born in Lumbini gardens.[25] However, scholars such as Richard Gombrich consider this a dubious claim because a combination of evidence suggests he was born in the Shakyas community one that later gave him the title Shakyamuni, and the Shakya community was governed by a small oligarchy or republic-like council where there were no ranks but where seniority mattered instead.[note 6] Some of the stories about Buddha, his life, his teachings, and claims about the society he grew up in may have been invented and interpolated at a later time into the Buddhist texts.[30]

According to the Buddhist sutras, Gautama was moved by the innate suffering of humanity and its endless repetition due to rebirth. He set out on a quest to end this repeated suffering. Early Buddhist canonical texts and early biographies of Gautama state that Gautama first studied under Vedic teachers, namely Alara Kalama (Sanskrit: Arada Kalama) and Uddaka Ramaputta (Sanskrit: Udraka Ramaputra), learning meditation and ancient philosophies, particularly the concept of "nothingness, emptiness" from the former, and "what is neither seen nor unseen" from the latter.[31][32][note 7]

Finding these teachings to be insufficient to attain his goal, he turned to the practice of asceticism. This too fell short of attaining his goal, and then he turned to the practice of dhyana, meditation, which he had already discovered in his youth. He famously sat in meditation under a Ficus religiosa tree now called the Bodhi Tree in the town of Bodh Gaya in the Gangetic plains region of South Asia. He gained insight into the workings of karma and his former lives, and attained enlightenment, certainty about the Middle Way (Skt. madhyam-pratipad) as the right path of spiritual practice to end suffering (dukkha) from rebirths in Sasra.[36] As a fully enlightened Buddha (Skt. samyaksabuddha), he attracted followers and founded a Sangha (monastic order). Now, as the Buddha, he spent the rest of his life teaching the Dharma he had discovered, and died at the age of 80 in Kushinagar, India.

Buddha's teachings were propagated by his followers, which in the last centuries of the 1st millennium BCE became over 18 Buddhist sub-schools of thought, each with its own basket of texts containing different interpretations and authentic teachings of the Buddha;[40][41] these over time evolved into many traditions of which the more well known and widespread in the modern era are Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism.[42][note 8]

The Four Truths express the basic orientation of Buddhism: we crave and cling to impermanent states and things, which is dukkha, "incapable of satisfying"[web 2] and painful. This keeps us caught in sasra, the endless cycle of repeated rebirth, dukkha and dying again.[note 9] But there is a way to liberation from this endless cycle to the state of nirvana, namely following the Noble Eightfold Path. [note 10]

The truth of dukkha is the basic insight that life in this "mundane world," with its clinging and craving to impermanent states and things" is dukkha, and unsatisfactory.[web 3]Dukkha can be translated as "incapable of satisfying,"[web 2] "the unsatisfactory nature and the general insecurity of all conditioned phenomena"; or "painful."Dukkha is most commonly translated as "suffering," which is an incorrect translation, since it refers not to literal suffering, but to the ultimately unsatisfactory nature of temporary states and things, including pleasant but temporary experiences.[note 11] We expect happiness from states and things which are impermanent, and therefore cannot attain real happiness.

In Buddhism, dukkha is one of the three marks of existence, along with impermanence and anatt (non-self).[68] Buddhism, like other major Indian religions, asserts that everything is impermanent (anicca), but, unlike them, also asserts that there is no permanent self or soul in living beings (anatt).[69][70][71] The ignorance or misperception (avijj) that anything is permanent or that there is self in any being is considered a wrong understanding, and the primary source of clinging and dukkha.[72][73][74]

Dukkha arises when we crave (Pali: tanha) and cling to these changing phenomena. The clinging and craving produces karma, which ties us to samsara, the round of death and rebirth.[web 7][note 12] Craving includes kama-tanha, craving for sense-pleasures; bhava-tanha, craving to continue the cycle of life and death, including rebirth; and vibhava-tanha, craving to not experience the world and painful feelings.

Dukkha ceases, or can be confined, when craving and clinging cease or are confined. This also means that no more karma is being produced, and rebirth ends.[note 13] Cessation is nirvana, "blowing out," and peace of mind.

By following the Buddhist path to moksha, liberation, one starts to disengage from craving and clinging to impermanent states and things. The term "path" is usually taken to mean the Noble Eightfold Path, but other versions of "the path" can also be found in the Nikayas. The Theravada tradition regards insight into the four truths as liberating in itself.

Sasra means "wandering" or "world", with the connotation of cyclic, circuitous change. It refers to the theory of rebirth and "cyclicality of all life, matter, existence", a fundamental assumption of Buddhism, as with all major Indian religions.[86] Samsara in Buddhism is considered to be dukkha, unsatisfactory and painful, perpetuated by desire and avidya (ignorance), and the resulting karma.[88]

The theory of rebirths, and realms in which these rebirths can occur, is extensively developed in Buddhism, in particular Tibetan Buddhism with its wheel of existence (Bhavacakra) doctrine. Liberation from this cycle of existence, Nirvana, has been the foundation and the most important historical justification of Buddhism.[90]

The later Buddhist texts assert that rebirth can occur in six realms of existence, namely three good realms (heavenly, demi-god, human) and three evil realms (animal, hungry ghosts, hellish).[note 14] Samsara ends if a person attains nirvana, the "blowing out" of the desires and the gaining of true insight into impermanence and non-self reality.[94]

Rebirth refers to a process whereby beings go through a succession of lifetimes as one of many possible forms of sentient life, each running from conception to death. In Buddhist thought, this rebirth does not involve any soul, because of its doctrine of anatt (Sanskrit: antman, no-self doctrine) which rejects the concepts of a permanent self or an unchanging, eternal soul, as it is called in Hinduism and Christianity.[97] According to Buddhism there ultimately is no such thing as a self in any being or any essence in any thing.[98]

The Buddhist traditions have traditionally disagreed on what it is in a person that is reborn, as well as how quickly the rebirth occurs after each death.[100] Some Buddhist traditions assert that "no self" doctrine means that there is no perduring self, but there is avacya (inexpressible) self which migrates from one life to another. The majority of Buddhist traditions, in contrast, assert that vijna (a person's consciousness) though evolving, exists as a continuum and is the mechanistic basis of what undergoes rebirth, rebecoming and redeath. The rebirth depends on the merit or demerit gained by one's karma, as well as that accrued on one's behalf by a family member.[note 15]

Each rebirth takes place within one of five realms according to Theravadins, or six according to other schools heavenly, demi-gods, humans, animals, hungry ghosts and hellish.[note 16]

In East Asian and Tibetan Buddhism, rebirth is not instantaneous, and there is an intermediate state (Tibetan "bardo") between one life and the next.[114] The orthodox Theravada position rejects the wait, and asserts that rebirth of a being is immediate. However there are passages in the Samyutta Nikaya of the Pali Canon that seem to lend support to the idea that the Buddha taught about an intermediate stage between one life and the next.[pageneeded]

In Buddhism, Karma (from Sanskrit: "action, work") drives sasrathe endless cycle of suffering and rebirth for each being. Good, skilful deeds (Pali: "kusala") and bad, unskilful deeds (Pli: "akusala") produce "seeds" in the unconscious receptacle (laya) that mature later either in this life or in a subsequent rebirth. The existence of Karma is a core belief in Buddhism, as with all major Indian religions, it implies neither fatalism nor that everything that happens to a person is caused by Karma.[note 17]

A central aspect of Buddhist theory of karma is that intent (cetan) matters and is essential to bring about a consequence or phala "fruit" or vipka "result".[note 18] However, good or bad karma accumulates even if there is no physical action, and just having ill or good thoughts create karmic seeds; thus, actions of body, speech or mind all lead to karmic seeds. In the Buddhist traditions, life aspects affected by the law of karma in past and current births of a being include the form of rebirth, realm of rebirth, social class, character and major circumstances of a lifetime.[125] It operates like the laws of physics, without external intervention, on every being in all six realms of existence including human beings and gods.

A notable aspect of the karma theory in Buddhism is merit transfer.[127] A person accumulates merit not only through intentions and ethical living, but also is able to gain merit from others by exchanging goods and services, such as through dna (charity to monks or nuns). Further, a person can transfer one's own good karma to living family members and ancestors.[note 19]

The cessation of the kleshas and the attainment of Nirvana (nibbna), with which the cycle of rebirth ends, has been the primary and the soteriological goal of the Buddhist path for monastic life, since the time of the Buddha.[133] The term "path" is usually taken to mean the Noble Eightfold Path, but other versions of "the path" can also be found in the Nikayas.[note 20] In some passages in the Pali Canon, a distinction is being made between right knowledge or insight (samm-a), and right liberation or release (samm-vimutti), as the means to attain cessation and liberation.

Nirvana literally means "blowing out, quenching, becoming extinguished".[136] In early Buddhist texts, it is the state of restraint and self-control that leads to the "blowing out" and the ending of the cycles of sufferings associated with rebirths and redeaths.[140] Many later Buddhist texts describe nirvana as identical with Anatta with complete "Emptiness, Nothingness".[141][142][143][note 21] In some texts, the state is described with greater detail, such as passing through the gate of emptiness (sunyata) realizing that there is no soul or self in any living being, then passing through the gate of signlessness (animitta) realizing that nirvana cannot be perceived, and finally passing through the gate of wishlessness (apranihita) realizing that nirvana is the state of not even wishing for nirvana.[145][note 22]

The nirvana state has been described in Buddhist texts partly in a manner similar to other Indian religions, as the state of complete liberation, enlightenment, highest happiness, bliss, fearlessness, freedom, permanence, non-dependent origination, unfathomable, and indescribable.[147][148] It has also been described in part differently, as a state of spiritual release marked by "emptiness" and realization of non-Self.[149][150][151][note 23]

While Buddhism considers the liberation from Sasra as the ultimate spiritual goal, in traditional practice, the primary focus of a vast majority of lay Buddhists has been to seek and accumulate merit through good deeds, donations to monks and various Buddhist rituals in order to gain better rebirths rather than nirvana.[154][note 24]

While the Noble Eightfold Path is best-known in the west, a wide variety of practices and stages have been used and described in the Buddhist traditions. Basic practices include sila (ethics), samadhi (meditation, dhyana) and prajna (wisdom), as described in the Noble Eightfold Path. An important additional practice is a kind and compassionate attitude toward every living being and the world. Devotion is also important in some Buddhist traditions, and in the Tibetan traditions visualizations of deities and mandalas are important. The value of textual study is regarded differently in the various Buddhist traditions. It is central to Theravada and highly important to Tibetan Buddhism, while the Zen tradition takes an ambiguous stance.

Traditionally, the first step in most Buddhist schools requires taking Three Refuges, also called the Three Jewels (Sanskrit: triratna, Pali: tiratana) as the foundation of one's religious practice. Pali texts employ the Brahmanical motif of the triple refuge, found in the Rigveda 9.97.47, Rigveda 6.46.9 and Chandogya Upanishad 2.22.34. Tibetan Buddhism sometimes adds a fourth refuge, in the lama. The three refuges are believed by Buddhists to be protective and a form of reverence.

The Three Jewels are:

Reciting the three refuges is considered in Buddhism not as a place to hide, rather a thought that purifies, uplifts and strengthens.

An important guiding principle of Buddhist practice is the Middle Way (madhyamapratipad). It was a part of Buddha's first sermon, where he presented the Noble Eightfold Path that was a 'middle way' between the extremes of asceticism and hedonistic sense pleasures. In Buddhism, states Harvey, the doctrine of "dependent arising" (conditioned arising, prattyasamutpda) to explain rebirth is viewed as the 'middle way' between the doctrines that a being has a "permanent soul" involved in rebirth (eternalism) and "death is final and there is no rebirth" (annihilationism).

In the Theravada canon, the Pali-suttas, various often irreconcilable sequences can be found. According to Carol Anderson, the Theravada canon lacks "an overriding and comprehensive structure of the path to nibbana."[162] Nevertheless, the Noble Eightfold Path, or "Eightfold Path of the Noble Ones", has become an imprortant description of the Buddhist path. It consists of a set of eight interconnected factors or conditions, that when developed together, lead to the cessation of dukkha. These eight factors are: Right View (or Right Understanding), Right Intention (or Right Thought), Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration.

This Eightfold Path is the fourth of the Four Noble Truths, and asserts the path to the cessation of dukkha (suffering, pain, unsatisfactoriness).[165] The path teaches that the way of the enlightened ones stopped their craving, clinging and karmic accumulations, and thus ended their endless cycles of rebirth and suffering.

The Noble Eightfold Path is grouped into three basic divisions, as follows:

Mahyna Buddhism is based principally upon the path of a Bodhisattva. A Bodhisattva refers to one who is on the path to buddhahood. The term Mahyna was originally a synonym for Bodhisattvayna or "Bodhisattva Vehicle."

In the earliest texts of Mahayana Buddhism, the path of a bodhisattva was to awaken the bodhicitta. Between the 1st and 3rd century CE, this tradition introduced the Ten Bhumi doctrine, which means ten levels or stages of awakening. This development was followed by the acceptance that it is impossible to achieve Buddhahood in one (current) lifetime, and the best goal is not nirvana for oneself, but Buddhahood after climbing through the ten levels during multiple rebirths. Mahayana scholars then outlined an elaborate path, for monks and laypeople, and the path includes the vow to help teach Buddhist knowledge to other beings, so as to help them cross samsara and liberate themselves, once one reaches the Buddhahood in a future rebirth. One part of this path are the Pramit (perfections, to cross over), derived from the Jatakas tales of Buddha's numerous rebirths.

The Mahayana texts are inconsistent in their discussion of the Paramitas, and some texts include lists of two, others four, six, ten and fifty-two.[193] The six paramitas have been most studied, and these are:[193]

In Mahayana Sutras that include ten Paramitas, the additional four perfections are "skillful means, vow, power and knowledge". The most discussed Paramita and the highest rated perfection in Mahayana texts is the "Prajna-paramita", or the "perfection of insight". This insight in the Mahayana tradition, states Shhei Ichimura, has been the "insight of non-duality or the absence of reality in all things".[198][199]

la (Sanskrit) or sla (Pli) is the concept of "moral virtues", that is the second group and an integral part of the Noble Eightfold Path. It consists of right speech, right action and right livelihood.

la appear as ethical precepts for both lay and ordained Buddhist devotees. It includes the Five Precepts for laypeople, Eight or Ten Precepts for monastic life, as well as rules of Dhamma (Vinaya or Patimokkha) adopted by a monastery.[200]

The five precepts (panca-sila) are moral behavioural and ritual guidelines for lay devotees in Buddhism, while those following a monastic life have rules of conduct (patimokkha). The five precepts apply to both male and female devotees, and these are:[200][203]

These precepts are not commandments and transgressions do not invite religious sanctions, but their power has been in the Buddhist belief in karmic consequences and their impact in afterlife during rebirth. Killing in Buddhist belief leads to rebirth in the hellish realm, and for a longer time in more severe conditions if the murder victim was a monk. Adultery, similarly, invites a rebirth as prostitute or in hell, depending on whether the partner was unmarried or married. Saving animals from slaughter for meat, is believed to be a way to acquire merit for better rebirth. These moral precepts have been voluntarily self-enforced in lay Buddhist culture through the associated belief in karma and rebirth.

The monastic life in Buddhism has additional precepts as part of patimokkha, and unlike lay people, transgressions by monks do invite sanctions. Full expulsion from sangha follows any instance of killing, engaging in sexual intercourse, theft or false claims about one's knowledge. Temporary expulsion follows a lesser offence. The sanctions vary by the monastic fraternity (nikaya).

The precepts for monks in many Buddhist fraternities are eight (asta shila) or ten (das shila). Four of these are same as for the lay devotee: no killing, no stealing, no lying, and no intoxicants.[208] The other four precepts are:[208][note 25]

Some sangha add two more precepts: abstain from dancing and singing, and abstain from accepting money. In addition to these precepts, Buddhist monasteries have hundreds of rules of dhamma conduct, which are a part of its patimokkha.[210][note 27]

Vinaya is the specific code of conduct for a sangha of monks or nuns. It includes the Patimokkha, a set of 227 offences including 75 rules of decorum for monks, along with penalties for transgression, in the Theravadin tradition. The precise content of the Vinaya Pitaka (scriptures on the Vinaya) differs in different schools and tradition, and different monasteries set their own standards on its implementation. The list of pattimokkha is recited every fortnight in a ritual gathering of all monks. Buddhist text with vinaya rules for monasteries have been traced in all Buddhist traditions, with the oldest surviving being the ancient Chinese translations.

Monastic communities in the Buddhist tradition cut normal social ties to family and community, and live as "islands unto themselves". Within a monastic fraternity, a sangha has its own rules. A monk abides by these institutionalized rules, and living life as the vinaya prescribes it is not merely a means, but very nearly the end in itself. Transgressions by a monk on Sangha vinaya rules invites enforcement, which can include temporary or permanent expulsion.

A wide range of meditation practices has developed in the Buddhist traditions, but "meditation" primarily refers to the practice of dhyana c.q. jhana. It is a practice in which the attention of the mind is first narrowed to the focus on one specific object, such as the breath, a concrete object, or a specific thought, mental image or mantra. After this initial focussing of the mind, the focus is coupled to mindfulness, maintaining a calm mind while being aware of one's surroundings. The practice of dhyana aids in maintaining a calm mind, and avoiding disturbance of this calm mind by mindfulness of disturbing thoughts and feelings.[note 28]

The earliest evidence of yogis and their meditative tradition, states Karel Werner, is found in the Kein hymn 10.136 of the Rigveda.[218] While evidence suggests meditation was practiced in the centuries preceding the Buddha, the meditative methodologies described in the Buddhist texts are some of the earliest among texts that have survived into the modern era. These methodologies likely incorporate what existed before the Buddha as well as those first developed within Buddhism.[note 29]

According to Bronkhorst, the Four Dhyanas was a Buddhist invention. Bronkhorst notes that the Buddhist canon has a mass of contradictory statements, little is known about their relative chronology, and "there can be no doubt that the canon including the older parts, the Sutra and Vinaya Pitaka was composed over a long period of time". Meditative practices were incorporated from other sramanic movements; the Buddhist texts describe how Buddha learnt the practice of the formless dhyana from Brahmanical practices, in the Nikayas ascribed to Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputta. The Buddhist canon also describes and criticizes alternative dhyana practices, which likely mean the pre-existing mainstream meditation practices of Jainism and Hinduism.

Buddha added a new focus and interpretation, particularly through the Four Dhyanas methodology, in which mindfulness is maintained. Further, the focus of meditation and the underlying theory of liberation guiding the meditation has been different in Buddhism. For example, states Bronkhorst, the verse 4.4.23 of the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad with its "become calm, subdued, quiet, patiently enduring, concentrated, one sees soul in oneself" is most probably a meditative state. The Buddhist discussion of meditation is without the concept of soul and the discussion criticizes both the ascetic meditation of Jainism and the "real self, soul" meditation of Hinduism.

For Nirvana, Buddhist texts teach various meditation methodologies, of which rupa-jhana (four meditations in the realm of form) and arupa-jhana (four meditations in the formless realm) have been the most studied.[238] These are described in the Pali Canon as trance-like states in the world of desirelessness.[239] The four dhyanas under rupa-jhanas are:[239]

The arupa-jhanas (formless realm meditation) are also four, which are entered by those who have mastered the rupa-jhanas (Arhats).[239][240] The first formless dhyana gets to infinite space without form or colour or shape, the second to infinity of perception base of the infinite space, the third formless dhyana transcends object-subject perception base, while the fourth is where he dwells in nothing-at-all where there are no feelings, no ideas, nor are there non-ideas, unto total cessation.[240] The four rupa-dhyanas in Buddhist practice lead to rebirth in successfully better rupa Brahma heavenly realms, while arupa-dhyanas lead into arupa heavens.[241][242]

Richard Gombrich notes that the sequence of the four rupa-jhanas describes two different cognitive states. The first two describe a narrowing of attention, while in the third and fourth jhana attention is expanded again.[note 31][244] Alexander Wynne further explains that the dhyana-scheme is poorly understood. According to Wynne, words expressing the inculcation of awareness, such as sati, sampajno, and upekkh, are mistranslated or understood as particular factors of meditative states, whereas they refer to a particular way of perceiving the sense objects.[note 32][note 33]

The Buddhist tradition has incorporated two traditions regarding the use of dhyna (meditation, Pali jhna). There is a tradition that stresses attaining praj (insight, bodhi, kensh, vipassana) as the means to awakening and liberation. But it has also incorporated the yogic tradition, as reflected in the use of jhana, which is rejected in other sutras as not resulting in the final result of liberation.[note 34] Schmithausen discerns three possible roads to liberation as described in the suttas,[note 35] to which Vetter adds the sole practice of dhyana itself.[note 36] According to Vetter and Bronkhorst, the earliest Buddhist path consisted of a set of practices which culminate in the practice of dhyana, leading to a calm of mind which according to Vetter is the liberation which is being sought. Later on, "liberating insight" came to be regarded as equally liberating. This "liberating insight" came to be exemplified by prajna, or the insight in the "four truths," but also by other elements of the Buddhist teachings.

The four immeasurables or four abodes, also called Brahma-viharas, are virtues or directions for meditation in Buddhist traditions, which helps a person be reborn in the heavenly (Brahma) realm.[255][256][257] These are traditionally believed to be a characteristic of the deity Brahma and the heavenly abode he resides in.[258]

The four Brahma-vihara are:

According to Peter Harvey, the Buddhist scriptures acknowledge that the four Brahmavihara meditation practices "did not originate within the Buddhist tradition".[260][note 37] The Brahmavihara (sometimes as Brahmaloka), along with the tradition of meditation and the above four immeasurables are found in pre-Buddha and post-Buddha Vedic and Sramanic literature.[262][263] Aspects of the Brahmavihara practice for rebirths into the heavenly realm have been an important part of Buddhist meditation tradition.[264][265]

According to Gombrich, the Buddhist usage of the brahma-vihra originally referred to an awakened state of mind, and a concrete attitude toward other beings which was equal to "living with Brahman" here and now. The later tradition took those descriptions too literally, linking them to cosmology and understanding them as "living with Brahman" by rebirth in the Brahma-world. According to Gombrich, "the Buddha taught that kindness what Christians tend to call love was a way to salvation."

Idols of deity and icons have been a part of the historic practice, and in Buddhist texts such as the 11th-century Sadanamala, a devotee visualizes and identifies himself or herself with the imagined deity as part of meditation.[270] This has been particularly popular in Vajrayana meditative traditions, but also found in Mahayana and Theravada traditions, particularly in temples and with Buddha images.

In Tibetan Buddhism tradition, mandala are mystical maps for the visualization process with cosmic symbolism. There are numerous deities, each with a mandala, and they are used during initiation ceremonies and meditation. The mandalas are concentric geometric shapes symbolizing layers of the external world, gates and sacred space. The meditation deity is in the centre, sometimes surrounded by protective gods and goddesses. Visualizations with deities and mandalas in Buddhism is a tradition traceable to ancient times, and likely well established by the time the 5th-century text Visuddhimagga was composed.[272]

According to Peter Harvey, whenever Buddhism has been healthy, not only ordained but also more committed lay people have practiced formal meditation. Loud devotional chanting however, adds Harvey, has been the most prevalent Buddhist practice and considered a form of meditation that produces "energy, joy, lovingkindness and calm", purifies mind and benefits the chanter.

Throughout most of Buddhist history, meditation has been primarily practiced in Buddhist monastic tradition, and historical evidence suggests that serious meditation by lay people has been an exception.[276][277] In recent history, sustained meditation has been pursued by a minority of monks in Buddhist monasteries. Western interest in meditation has led to a revival where ancient Buddhist ideas and precepts are adapted to Western mores and interpreted liberally, presenting Buddhism as a meditation-based form of spirituality.

Praj (Sanskrit) or pa (Pli) is insight or knowledge of the true nature of existence. The Buddhist tradition regards ignorance (avidy), a fundamental ignorance, misunderstanding or mis-perception of the nature of reality, as one of the basic causes of dukkha and samsara. By overcoming ignorance or misunderstanding one is enlightened and liberated. This overcoming includes awakening to impermanence and the non-self nature of reality, and this develops dispassion for the objects of clinging, and liberates a being from dukkha and sasra.[281][282]Praj is important in all Buddhist traditions, and is the wisdom about the dharmas, functioning of karma and rebirths, realms of samsara, impermanence of everything, no-self in anyone or anything, and dependent origination.

The origins of "liberating insight" are unclear. Buddhist texts, states Bronkhorst, do not describe it explicitly, and the content of "liberating insight" is likely not original to Buddhism.[285] According to Vetter and Bronkhorst, this growing importance of "liberating insight" was a response to other religious groups in India, which held that a liberating insight was indispensable for moksha, liberation from rebirth.[note 38]

Bronkhorst suggests that the conception of what exactly constituted "liberating insight" for Buddhists developed over time. Whereas originally it may not have been specified as an insight, later on the Four Noble Truths served as such, to be superseded by pratityasamutpada, and still later, in the Hinayana schools, by the doctrine of the non-existence of a substantial self or person.

Other descriptions of this "liberating insight" exist in the Buddhist canon: that the five Skandhas are impermanent, disagreeable, and neither the Self nor belonging to oneself"; "the contemplation of the arising and disappearance (udayabbaya) of the five Skandhas"; "the realisation of the Skandhas as empty (rittaka), vain (tucchaka) and without any pith or substance (asaraka).

In the Pali Canon liberating insight is attained in the fourth dhyana. However, states Vetter, modern scholarship on the Pali Canon has uncovered a "whole series of inconsistencies in the transmission of the Buddha's word", and there are many conflicting versions of what constitutes higher knowledge and samadhi that leads to the liberation from rebirth and suffering. Even within the Four Dhyana methodology of meditation, Vetter notes that "penetrating abstract truths and penetrating them successively does not seem possible in a state of mind which is without contemplation and reflection." According to Vetter, dhyna itself constituted the original "liberating practice".[note 36]

Carol Anderson notes that insight is often depicted in the Vinaya as the opening of the Dhamma eye, which sets one on the Buddhist path to liberation.[294]

In Theravada Buddhism, but also in Tibetan Buddhism, two types of meditation Buddhist practices are being followed, namely samatha (Pli; Sanskrit: amatha; "calm") and vipassana (insight).[296] Samatha is also called "calming meditation", and was adopted into Buddhism from pre-Buddha Indian traditions. Vipassan meditation was added by Buddha, and refers to "insight meditation". Vipassana does not aim at peace and tranquillity, states Damien Keown, but "the generation of penetrating and critical insight (panna)".

The focus of Vipassana meditation is to continuously and thoroughly know impermanence of everything (annica), no-Self in anything (anatta) and the dukkha teachings of Buddhism.[298][299]

Contemporary Theravada orthodoxy regards samatha as a preparation for vipassan, pacifying the mind and strengthening the concentration in order to allow the work of insight, which leads to liberation. In contrast, the Vipassana Movement argues that insight levels can be discerned without the need for developing samatha further due to the risks of going out of the course when strong samatha is developed.

Pratityasamutpada, also called "dependent arising, or dependent origination", is the Buddhist theory to explain the nature and relations of being, becoming, existence and ultimate reality. Buddhism asserts that there is nothing independent, except the state of nirvana. All physical and mental states depend on and arise from other pre-existing states, and in turn from them arise other dependent states while they cease.

The 'dependent arisings' have a causal conditioning, and thus Pratityasamutpada is the Buddhist belief that causality is the basis of ontology, not a creator God nor the ontological Vedic concept called universal Self (Brahman) nor any other 'transcendent creative principle'.[303][304] However, the Buddhist thought does not understand causality in terms of Newtonian mechanics, rather it understands it as conditioned arising.[306] In Buddhism, dependent arising is referring to conditions created by a plurality of causes that necessarily co-originate a phenomenon within and across lifetimes, such as karma in one life creating conditions that lead to rebirth in one of the realms of existence for another lifetime.[307][308]

Buddhism applies the dependent arising theory to explain origination of endless cycles of dukkha and rebirth, through its Twelve Nidnas or "twelve links" doctrine. It states that because Avidy (ignorance) exists Saskras (karmic formations) exists, because Saskras exists therefore Vijna (consciousness) exists, and in a similar manner it links Nmarpa (sentient body), ayatana (six senses), Spara (sensory stimulation), Vedan (feeling), Tah (craving), Updna (grasping), Bhava (becoming), Jti (birth), and Jarmaraa (old age, death, sorrow, pain).

By breaking the circuitous links of the Twelve Nidanas, Buddhism asserts that liberation from these endless cycles of rebirth and dukkha can be attained.[312]

nyat, or "emptiness", is a central concept in Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka school, and widely attested in the Prajpramit sutras. It brings together key Buddhist doctrines, particularly anatta and dependent origination, to refute the metaphysics of Sarvastivada and Sautrntika (extinct non-Mahayana schools). Not only sentient beings are empty of tman; all phenomena (dharmas) are without any svabhava (literally "own-nature" or "self-nature"), and thus without any underlying essence, and "empty" of being independent; thus the heterodox theories of svabhava circulating at the time were refuted on the basis of the doctrines of early Buddhism.

Sarvastivada teachings, which were criticized by Ngrjuna, were reformulated by scholars such as Vasubandhu and Asanga and were adapted into the Yogachara school. While the Mdhyamaka school held that asserting the existence or non-existence of any ultimately real thing was inappropriate, some exponents of Yogachara asserted that the mind and only the mind is ultimately real (a doctrine known as cittamatra). Not all Yogacharins asserted that mind was truly existent; Vasubandhu and Asanga in particular did not.[web 9] These two schools of thought, in opposition or synthesis, form the basis of subsequent Mahayana metaphysics in the Indo-Tibetan tradition.

Buddha-nature is a concept found in some 1st-millennium CE Buddhist texts, such as the Tathgatagarbha stras. This concept has been controversial in Buddhism, but has a following in East Asian Buddhism. These Sutras suggest, states Paul Williams, that 'all sentient beings contain a Tathagata' as their 'essence, core inner nature, Self'.[note 39] The Tathagatagarbha doctrine, at its earliest probably appeared about the later part of the 3rd century CE, and it contradicts the Anatta doctrine (non-Self) in a vast majority of Buddhist texts, leading scholars to posit that the Tathagatagarbha Sutras were written to promote Buddhism to non-Buddhists.[319] However, the Buddhist text Ratnagotravibhga states that the "Self" implied in Tathagatagarbha doctrine is actually "not-Self".

Devotion is an important part of the practice of most Buddhists. Devotional practices include ritual prayer, prostration, offerings, pilgrimage, and chanting. In Pure Land Buddhism, devotion to the Buddha Amitabha is the main practice. In Nichiren Buddhism, devotion to the Lotus Sutra is the main practice. Bhakti (called Bhatti in Pali) has been a common practice in Theravada Buddhism, where offerings and group prayers are made to deities and particularly images of Buddha.[324] According to Karel Werner and other scholars, devotional worship has been a significant practice in Theravada Buddhism, and deep devotion is part of Buddhist traditions starting from the earliest days.[325][326]

Guru devotion is a central practice of Tibetan Buddhism.[327][328] The guru is considered essential and to the Buddhist devotee, the guru is the "enlightened teacher and ritual master" in Vajrayana spiritual pursuits.[327][329]

For someone seeking Buddhahood, the guru is the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, wrote the 12th-century Buddhist scholar Sadhanamala.[329] The veneration of and obedience to teachers is also important in Theravada and Zen Buddhism.[330]

Buddhism, like all Indian religions, was an oral tradition in ancient times.[331] The Buddha's words, the early doctrines and concepts, and the interpretations were transmitted from one generation to the next by the word of mouth in monasteries, and not through written texts. The first Buddhist canonical texts were likely written down in Sri Lanka, about 400 years after the Buddha died.[331] The texts were part of the Tripitakas, and many versions appeared thereafter claiming to be the words of the Buddha. Scholarly Buddhist commentary texts, with named authors, appeared in India, around the 2nd century CE.[331] These texts were written in Pali or Sanskrit, sometimes regional languages, as palm-leaf manuscripts, birch bark, painted scrolls, carved into temple walls, and later on paper.[331]

Unlike what the Bible is to Christianity and the Quran is to Islam, but like all major ancient Indian religions, there is no consensus among the different Buddhist traditions as to what constitutes the scriptures or a common canon in Buddhism.[331] The general belief among Buddhists is that the canonical corpus is vast.[332] This corpus includes the ancient Sutras organized into Nikayas, itself the part of three basket of texts called the Tripitakas.[335] Each Buddhist tradition has its own collection of texts, much of which is translation of ancient Pali and Sanskrit Buddhist texts of India. The Chinese Buddhist canon, for example, includes 2184 texts in 55 volumes, while the Tibetan canon comprises 1108 texts all claimed to have been spoken by the Buddha and another 3461 texts composed by Indian scholars revered in the Tibetan tradition.[336] The Buddhist textual history has been vast; over 40,000 manuscripts mostly Buddhist, some non-Buddhist, were discovered in 1900 in the Dunhuang Chinese cave alone.[336]

The Pli Tipitaka (Sanskrit: Tripiaka, three pitakas), which means "three baskets", refers to the Vinaya Pitaka, the Sutta Pitaka, and the Abhidhamma Pitaka. These constitute the oldest known canonical works of Buddhism. The Vinaya Pitaka contains disciplinary rules for the Buddhist monasteries. The Sutta Pitaka contains words attributed to the Buddha. The Abhidhamma Pitaka contain expositions and commentaries on the Sutta, and these vary significantly between Buddhist schools.

The Pli Tipitaka is the only surviving early Tipitaka. According to some sources, some early schools of Buddhism had five or seven pitakas. Much of the material in the Canon is not specifically "Theravadin", but is instead the collection of teachings that this school preserved from the early, non-sectarian body of teachings. According to Peter Harvey, it contains material at odds with later Theravadin orthodoxy. He states: "The Theravadins, then, may have added texts to the Canon for some time, but they do not appear to have tampered with what they already had from an earlier period."

In addition to the Pali Canon, the important commentary texts of the Theravada tradition include the 5th-century Visuddhimagga by Buddhaghosa of the Mahavihara school. It includes sections on shila (virtues), samadhi (concentration), panna (wisdom) as well as Theravada tradition's meditation methodology.[339]

The Mahayana sutras are a very broad genre of Buddhist scriptures that the Mahayana Buddhist tradition holds are original teachings of the Buddha. Some adherents of Mahayana accept both the early teachings (including in this the Sarvastivada Abhidharma, which was criticized by Nagarjuna and is in fact opposed to early Buddhist thought) and the Mahayana sutras as authentic teachings of Gautama Buddha, and claim they were designed for different types of persons and different levels of spiritual understanding.

The Mahayana sutras often claim to articulate the Buddha's deeper, more advanced doctrines, reserved for those who follow the bodhisattva path. That path is explained as being built upon the motivation to liberate all living beings from unhappiness. Hence the name Mahyna (lit., the Great Vehicle). The Theravada school does not treat the Mahayana Sutras as authoritative or authentic teachings of the Buddha.[341][342]

Generally, scholars conclude that the Mahayana scriptures were composed from the 1st century CE onwards: "Large numbers of Mahayana sutras were being composed in the period between the beginning of the common era and the fifth century".

Many ancient Indian texts have not survived into the modern era, creating a challenge in establishing the historic commonalities between Theravada and Mahayana. The texts preserved in the Tibetan Buddhist monasteries, with parallel Chinese translations, have provided a breakthrough. Among these is the Mahayana text listamba Sutra which no longer exists in a Sanskrit version, but does in Tibetan and Chinese versions. This Mahayana text contains numerous sections which are remarkably the same as the Theravada Pali Canon and Nikaya Buddhism.[341][344] The listamba Sutra was cited by Mahayana scholars such as the 8th-century Yasomitra to be authoritative.[345] This suggests that Buddhist literature of different traditions shared a common core of Buddhist texts in the early centuries of its history, until Mahayana literature diverged about and after the 1st century CE.[341]

Historically, the roots of Buddhism lie in the religious thought of Iron Age India around the middle of the first millennium BCE. That was a period, states Abraham Eraly, of great intellectual ferment, when the Upanishads were composed marking a change in the historical Vedic religion, as well as the emergence of great Sramanic traditions.[347] According to Richard Gombrich, this was not only a period of intellectual ferment but also socio-cultural change quite distinct from the early Vedic period.[note 40]

New ideas developed both in the Vedic tradition in the form of the Upanishads, and outside of the Vedic tradition through the ramaa movements.[350][351][352] The term ramaa refers to several Indian religious movements parallel to but separate from the historical Vedic religion, including Buddhism, Jainism and others such as jvika.[353]

Several ramaa movements are known to have existed in India before the 6th century BCE (pre-Buddha, pre-Mahavira), and these influenced both the stika and nstika traditions of Indian philosophy.[354] According to Martin Wilshire, the Sramana tradition evolved in India over two phases, namely Paccekabuddha and Savaka phases, the former being the tradition of individual ascetic and the latter of disciples, and that Buddhism and Jainism ultimately emerged from these.[355] Brahmanical and non-Brahmanical ascetic groups shared and used several similar ideas, but the ramaa traditions also drew upon already established Brahmanical concepts and philosophical roots, states Wiltshire, to formulate their own doctrines.[354][357] Brahmanical motifs can be found in the oldest Buddhist texts, using them to introduce and explain Buddhist ideas. For example, prior to Buddhist developments, the Brahmanical tradition internalized and variously reinterpreted the three Vedic sacrificial fires as concepts such as Truth, Rite, Tranquility or Restraint. Buddhist texts also refer to the three Vedic sacrificial fires, reinterpreting and explaining them as ethical conduct.

The Sramanic religions challenged and broke with the Brahmanic tradition on core assumptions such as Atman (soul, self), Brahman, the nature of afterlife, and they rejected the authority of the Vedas and Upanishads.[361][363] Buddhism was one among several Indian religions that did so.[363]

The rest is here:
Buddhism - Wikipedia

Early history

Diffusion of Buddhism

Southeast Asia

Tibet

China

Japan

Influence of the West

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Buddhism is a Western term for the immensely diverse system of beliefs and practices centered on the teachings and person of the historical Buddha, who enunciated his message of salvation in India over two millennia ago. The general concept easily lends itself to a false sense of empirical unity remote from the complex history of the tradition and the varied faiths of the individual believers. In the centuries following the promulgation of the original teaching and the formation of the earliest community, Indian Buddhism underwent a massive process of missionary diffusion throughout the Asian world, assimilating new values and undergoing major changes in doctrinal and institutional principles. Today, under the impact of conflicting ideologies and of science and technology, Buddhism, like all the great religions, finds itself, amid the acids of modernity, undergoing vast internal changes which further prohibit simplistic stereotypes and definitions.

The traditional distinction between the major historical forms of Buddhism has centered on a threefold typology, based on doctrinal and institutional differences which seem to fall within relatively homogeneous geographical areas. They are (1) The Theravada (teaching of the elders), located in the lands of southeast Asiamost importantly in Ceylon, Burma, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, and Cambodia; (2) the Mahyna (great vehicle), in Nepal, Sikkim, China, Korea, and Japan; and (3) the Tan tray na (esoteric vehicle), formerly prevalent in Tibet, Mongolia, and parts of Siberia. However, this classification is crosscut with atypical variations. The Theravda, as it exists today, represents the sole survivor of the numerous ancient Indian schools. It has a fixed body of canonical literature, a relatively unified orthodox teaching, a clearly structured institutional distinction between the monastic order and laity, and a long history as the established church of the various southeast Asian states.

The Mahyna, on the other hand, is a diffuse and vastly complex combination of many schools and sects, based on a heterogeneous literature of massive proportions from which no uniform doctrinal or institutional orthodoxy can ever be derived. There are certain key scriptures which are sometimes regarded as typifying the more universal thrust of Mahyna principles over against Theravda teaching, and Theravda has traditionally been stigmatized as Hnayna (small vehicle) by Mahynists; but Mahyna itself is also to be found on the southeast Asian mainland, in syncretistic fusion with Theravda. In China and Japan its literature ranges from the most abstruse philosophy to popular devotional theism and magic, and it includes the Hnayana sources as well. Institutionally it has appeared both in monastic and in radically laicized forms, and it has occasionally served in well-defined church-state configurations.

Tantrie Buddhism, dominantly identified with Tibetan Lamaism and its theocracy, is equally ambiguous. The esoteric Tantrie teachings, which originated in India, persisted in several so-called Mahyna schools in China and Japan. In its Tibetan form Tantric Buddhism was richly fused with a native primitivism, and it underwent important and very divergent sectarian developments. The Tibetan monasteries contain (or did contain) superb collections of Mahyna and Hinayna sources in addition to the Tantric literature.

The statistics of Buddhist membership are even more deceptive. The total given has frequently ranged from 150,000,000 to 300,000,000with the variation based principally on the fact that in Mahyna lands orthodox commitment to one religious faith was never a significant cultural characteristic. The populations of China and Japan could not be categorized as Buddhist, Taoist, Confucian, or Shintoist in the same way that Western religious history seems to lend itself to relatively clear confessional divisions between Protestants, Catholics, and Jews. In Japan, for example, Buddhism, Confucianism, and Shinto have frequently formed a single interlocking system for the specialized satisfaction of a wide range of personal and social needs. The same family that takes an infant to a Shinto shrine for a baptismal ceremony will, without any sense of conflict, have funeral rites conducted by Buddhist monks and maintain family ancestral worship and ethical standards largely dominated by Confucian values.

In southeast Asia approximately 90 per cent of the total population is Buddhist, monastic and lay. In China, just prior to 1949 less than one-fifth of the popular cults were recognizably oriented to Buddhism in some form, and only a small fraction of the total population (under 1 per cent) were specifically affiliated with the monastic orders. Since 1949 this percentage has been further reduced, as it also has, most recently and drastically, in Tibet, where over one-fifth of the total population once lived in the monasteries. In Japan more than three-quarters of the population have Buddhist affiliations, while in India and Pakistan after an absence of many centuriesBuddhism has only recently, during the past few decades, begun to return in strength; however, it still numbers less than 1 per cent. Since the eighteenth century, with the first Asian emigrations to the West, Buddhism has found its way into Europe, Great Britain, South America, and the United States. The number of conversions among the populations of these countries is small in total number but is of considerable cultural significance, since conversions frequently reflect dissatis-faction with Western values and goals.

Amid this diversity there are a few central elements, which may be taken as generally characteristic of Buddhism throughout the larger part of its history. First, for all Buddhists the common point of unity has been in the symbol of the Buddhawhether revered chiefly as a human teacher, as in Theravda, or worshiped as a supreme deity, as in certain forms of theistic Mahyna. In all cases the element of personal commitment in faith is present in some form. Second, Buddhism is one of the three major religions of the world which defines the human situation with sufficient universality for all mankind to fall within the scope of its message of salvation without prior criteria of social, ethnic, or geographic origin. The voluntary act of personal conversion in response to the teaching was from the very beginning and still remains one of the most decisive symbols of its missionary scope. Third, from the very beginning Buddhism was dominated by a religious elite for whom the monastic ideal and pursuit of a mystical, otherworldly goal were overriding concerns, frequently to the exclusion of consistent focus on mundane socioeconomic and political problems. However, even here there are many exceptions which must be noted and which require that Buddhism be defined with careful regard for its discrete historical forms.

The systematic study of Buddhism in full critical perspective began with the Enlightenment and the advent of Western colonialism in Asia during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The arduous translation of Buddhist scriptures and basic historical and institutional reconstructions were sufficiently well advanced by the end of the nineteenth century to provide raw material for bolder attempts at comparative evaluation.

In general it may be said that today the major obligations of study include, first, the basic Buddhist literature, doctrines, and institutions considered internallythat is, within the community itself and among individual believers, as they understand it; second, the external relationship and exchange between Buddhism and the larger cultural environments of which it has been a part including its relation to the goals of the state and its confrontation with other religions and ideologies; and third, what can be very broadly called the therapeutic contributions of Buddhist teaching to the human situationboth personal and social.

Historically, ancient Indian culture during the sixth century b.c. was to much of Asia what Hellenistic culture was to the West, and Buddhism was the missionary bearer of many of its values. The conditions underlying the emergence of Buddhism in ancient India were those generally characteristic of the wider process of sociocultural transition which took place during the first millenium b.c. across the face of the civilized world, from Greece to China. In the principal centers of the high cultures, archaic social and religious institutions were breaking down under the pressure of more complex forms of economic and political activity, associated with the urban revolution and the territorial expansion of new imperial states. In all cases, apparent economic and political advances were mixed with serious social disorders, hardship, and the loss of traditional religious moorings.

In this process of transformation, new philosophical and religious solutions were sought and attained by the formative thinkers whose teachings still lie behind the institutions and ways of life characteristic of the major civilizations of the world today. Socrates, the prophets of Israel, Confucius, and the Buddha were among the great innovators who, in distinctive ways, offered systematic critiques of the older values and redefined the meaning of existence and the nature of man and society within a more universal, transcendent framework, which became the basis for new cultural reconstruction.

In India during the seventh and sixth centuries b.c. there were significant developments in agricultural productivity, urban commerce based on a money economy, a new and increasingly affluent middle class, and the beginnings of rational bureaucracy. But these advances were offset by protracted power struggles between warring states for territory and economic resources. They resulted in the uprooting and extirpation of political minorities and the corrosion of the traditional forms of communal solidarity and religious legitimation a situation that provoked a deep spiritual malaise and intensified earlier innovating speculations about the meaning of the self and the world. The value of all worldly activities and of life itself was questioned with unparalleled sharpness.

The new religious and philosophical teachers in Indiamost significantly those whose doctrines are embodied in the Upanisads, in Buddhism, and in Jainismbegan their reconstructive enterprise quite paradoxically with a radical devaluation of the phenomenal world and the simultaneous affirmation of an otherworldly realm of absolute transcendence which alone is worthy to be the goal of all human striving. The normative religious problem emerged as one of personal salvation from bondage to phenomenal existence. The process of salvation was defined by a transmigrational metaphysic which forms an almost airtight theodicy: the soul (tman) undergoes an endless cycle of rebirth (samsra), in which the individual assumes a new physical form and status in the next life depending on the ethical quality of deeds (karma) in this life. The individual may attain salvation from this process by practicing the Yogaan autonomous, ascetic discipline of the inner self, of body, mind, and motivations, designed to eliminate the karmic source of the transmigratory process.

Although this basic metaphysic was presupposed by many of the major schools, there were sharp sectarian disputes on the theoretical particulars. This conflict was heightened by disagreements over the prevalent theory of social stratification, the caste system. From the brhman perspective all means of salvation were contained in the Vedas, and the law of karma was tied rigidly to the caste system: one is born in a particular caste as a result of deeds in the former life, and conformity to caste rules is the precondition of salvation or at least improvement in caste status in the next life. The non-brhmaic schools, like Buddhism and Jainism, denied the ultimacy of the Vedas and the ritual significance of caste. Their messages of salvation were preached openly. Admission was based on personal conversion, usually without ascriptive limitations of caste, class, or sex. Their teachings found rich soil among upwardly mobile urban commercial groups, who held that both soterio-logical and social status should be based on achievement criteria rather than on hereditary right.

Efforts to reconstruct the life and teachings of the Buddha and the institutions of the earliest Buddhist community run aground on many refractory critical problems. But the Buddhas life story, overlaid in its many versions with legend and myth, is nevertheless persuasive in basic outline. The historical Buddha (enlightened one), named Siddhrtha Gautama, was born a prince of an indigenous Indian clan in northern India about 550 b.c. In his early youth he displayed unusual sensitivity to the pressing enigmas of human existence. His family endeavored unsuccessfully to distract him from these concerns and to insulate him from the signs of human finitudesuffering, contingency, and death. But at the age of 29, still preoccupied with the ultimate questions, he left to search for a means of salvation. For some years he tested and rejected radical physical asceticism and abstract philosophy. Finally, in a single night of intensive meditation he achieved enlightenment and evolved his own unique diagnosis and teaching (Dharma). He then embarked on a missionary career, preaching his message of salvation openly to all without a closed fist. He formed an ever-widening community (Sangha) of mendicant disciples from all castes, including women and lay devotees, and after a long ministry he died at the age of 80.

The major forms of the tradition represent the Buddha as teaching an exoteric, practical Yoga which followed the so-called middle patha mean between the extremes of bodily indulgence, self-mortification, and speculative philosophy. This is a qualitative, not merely an expedient, mean. It is based on the conviction that neither ritual manipulation of external physical formsincluding radical asceticism (e.g., Jainism)nor abstract intellectualism can touch the real core of the human problemthe habitual errors of the mind and the inward perversion of the will and motivational processes. The Buddhas unique diagnosis and soteriology are embodied classically in the four noble truths. (1) All creaturely existence is marked by duhkha (pain, anguish), an agonized bondage to the meaningless cycle of rebirths amid a transitory flux which is impermanent (anitya) and without essential being (antman). (2) The cause of this agony is ignorance (avidy) of the illusory nature of phenomenal existence and particularly the pernicious notion of the eternality of the soul, which ironically perpetuates the desire (t) for life. As individual consciousness is dissolving in death, this residual ignorance and desire once againin an inexorable causal sequenceform the empirical self from heterogenous phenomenal elements and chain it to the process of rebirth. (3) The removal of ignorance about and desire for phenomenal life will break the causal sequence and so precipitate final salvation. (4) For this purpose the proper Yoga is the eightfold path, an integral combination of ethics (la) and meditation (samdhi), which jointly purify the motivations and mind. This leads to the attainment of wisdom (praj), to enlightenment (bodhi), and to the ineffable Nirva (blowing out), the final release from the incarnational cycle and a mystical transcendence beyond all conceptualization.

The Yoga is radically autosoteriologicalan autonomous performance by the self-reliant individual. It demands total commitment, adequately expressed only in the role of the mendicant monk who has abandoned the aspirations of the everyday world and has undertaken a life devoted to full-time pursuit of the religious goal. Although the lay householder might practice the Yoga and originally was not excluded from the ultimate goal (the Buddha said only that it was harder for the householder to attain Nirva), it was inevitable that full spiritual perfection should be dominantly reserved for those whose deeper concern for salvation was institutionally defined by complete monastic commitment.

The rudiments of the teaching outlined here give only the barest suggestion of its innovatory and therapeutic potential. Always foremost is the paradigmatic grandeur of spiritual transcendence and renewal represented by the Buddha himself. His withdrawal from the givenness of the everyday world and his negation of it was the first step in gaining a new critical leverage over it. The principal symbols of world rejection and negation are not pessimism or nihilism. They negate and displace the archaic religious practices and forms of social organization in the name of a transcendent goal that places all men in a universal context of religious meaning through which the whole human situation can be comprehended and managed. Correlatively, it is possible to inculcate universal standards of conduct which establish expectations of interpersonal and intergroup relationships without particularistic, ascriptive limits of space or time.

The initial act of conversion, expressed in commitment to the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha, not only allows for the dramatization of personal dissatisfaction with ones present life situation but projects a longrange program of spiritual recovery and maturation, including the cathectic transformation of the whole personality and the internalization of new values, which can be publicly acted out. Enlightenment is not only the result of incessant meditation on the truths and on the transitoriness of life, which will ultimately eradicate desire for it; it requires motivational purification through the practice of universal virtues, in addition to monastic poverty and continence, love (maitr), and compassion (karu) toward all living creatures, the elimination of a host of specific vices, and the obligation to promote friendship and concord. Within the community the ritual divisions of caste and all ascriptive divisions are obliterated before the universal force of love and the knowledge of the common condition of all men.

The solidarity of the earliest mendicant community was centered on the charisma and teaching of the Buddha himself, but the growing number of converts, the addition of lay devotees, and the settlement of a number of cenobitic communities around major cities in the Ganges valley forced the routinization of discipline and teaching. By the end of the Buddhas long ministry the Sangha was differentiated along several characteristic lines; most important was the class distinction between the monastic elite and the lay devotees. The tradition relates that after the Buddhas death a council was convened at Rjagrha to regularize the teachings and monastic rule. The actual accomplishments of the council are uncertain, but it is apparent that a substantial body of the scriptures found in the present Theravdin canon and the residuals of other early schools already existed in oral form including the nuclear disciplinary code (Prtimoka) of the later full monastic rule (Vinaya) and much of the soteriological teaching embodied in the Buddhas discourses (Stra). The major ceremonials of communal life were in practice, most importantly the bimonthly uposathaa congregational assembly and confessional recital of the Prtimoksa. As a result of the increasing generosity of the laity, the various monastic centers soon possessed extensive properties and dwelling places, with a highly differentiated system of specialized roles for administration and teaching.

By the third century b.c. the Sangha was in the process of sectarian proliferation, ultimately forming a number of schools, each of which emphasized different philosophical and doctrinal features of the received tradition. Their distinctive doctrinal positions were embodied in commentaries on the early teachings, finally formingto take the Theravdin casethe Abhidhammathe third part of the threefold Pli canon (Tipitaka). According to uncertain tradition, a second council was convened at Vail one hundred years after the Buddhas death. There a series of sharp disagreements about the inner meaning of the teaching, the status of the laity, and the rigors of the monastic rule brought on the great schism, a split chiefly between the conservative forerunners of the Theravda and the more liberal Mhasaghika, whose doctrines were significantly related to the rise of Mahyna Buddhism in the following centuries.

The apparent failure of the first councils to unite the Sangha has to be gauged against the basic values of the teaching itself, the nature of monastic constitution, and the conception of internal authority. The early Sagha was never a church under one centralized control or subscriptionist orthodoxy. At Rjagha, after the Buddhas death (and supposedly at his own request), the idea of routine patriarchal succession was deliberately rejected. In keeping with autosoteriology, the primary function of the monastic rule was to protect the spiritual independence of each monk. It contains typically stringent rules and penalties dealing with sexual offenses, abuse of material possessions, and interpersonal disturbances and outlines legalrational procedures for dealing with internal disagreements. But the over-riding aim was to provide optimum conditions for pursuit of the ultimate religious goal, not to enforce ecclesiastical unity. Issues were discussed openly and decided by majority vote, with all ordained monks having equal franchise. The constitution of a monastery allowed free dissent in good faith, and if controversies could not be resolved, the rules governing schism allowed the dissenters to depart and form their own monastic center. Formal routinization finally included a status system based upon degree of spiritual perfection, knowledge and capacity to instruct, and seniority reckoned in a sequence of three decades from the date of ordination. There was a preceptor system for the guidance of novice monks, but the authority of the senior monks was in principle strictly advisory. The novice joined the Sangha by confessing his inward spiritual intention, but not within the framework of a system of bureaucratic office-charisma, as in the Roman and Byzantine churches, or of monastic obedience, such as we find in the Benedictine rule.

For the laity and for all secular spheres of social reality, the leadership of the Sangha developed a highly differentiated secondary soteriology, based on a merit-making ethic rationally oriented to the economic and political needs of the urban mercantile and artisan classes. In joining the Sangha, the lay devotees promised to conform to the five precepts (no killing, stealing, lying, adultery, or drinking of alcoholic beverages). By support of the monastic order and by their personal morality they could accumulate karmic merit and so be assured of better rebirth opportunities. By contrast with the archaic sacrificial rites which still persisted, Buddhism provided less-expensive religious media. The Buddhist laity were expected to make donations to the Sagha, but the soteriology stressed the autonomy of the self as the sacrificial agent.

In the Theravdin Siglovda Sutta, sometimes called the householders Vinaya, the layman is exhorted to pursue a lifetime of ethical self-discipline, for the sake of a well-being in this world and the next, including the maximization of economic efficiency. He must eliminate self-indulgent and wasteful vices which impair effective economic action: sensuality, hate, fear, and slothfulness. Undesirable business associates include those who lack self-discipline and waste human and physical resources. Slave trading and other dehumanizing practices are prohibited. The householder must train his children in socially useful occupations and carefully observe contractually defined ethical relationships with his family, servants, and business associates.

The lay theory of social stratification undercut caste criteria because it denied the religious ultimacy of the brhmas, the Vedas, and the ritual significance of caste divisions. The Buddha is represented as arguing that caste has no inherent sanctity because it arose historically as the result of occupational differentiationquite naturally, and not otherwise. The social status of women was much improved, and in theory women and men were equals within the Sagha. Political theory, though basically patrimonial, asserts that the power of the state is based on a historically evolved contractual relationship between the king and the people which requires that the king earn his keep by his executive skill and moral example.

By the end of the third century b.c., popular lay piety had begun to find its center of gravity in a semitheistic cult entailing the merit-making worship (pj) of saintly relics and of the Buddha himselfnow exalted to a supramundane plane and surrounded with symbols of his previous incarnations. The places of cultic worship (stpas and caityas) signify the pressure of the laity for religious means increasingly remote from the monastic autosoteriology. These cultic developments were accompanied by civilizing rationalizations of many indigenous archaic resources which facilitated missionary activitymyths, cosmologies, gods, demons, heavens, hells, and magicall subjected to the overarching power of the Buddha and the monastic order and tied to higher educational and socializing aims.

From the viewpoint of the expanding state in ancient India, Buddhism was from the very beginning a potentially valuable asset. The organized clergysworn to povertywas a powerful and relatively inexpensive medium for building social solidarity where traditional collectivities had been disrupted by force, and they could assist in more subtle forms of pacifist teaching where force was impractical. This was also particularly meaningful in an expanding economy dependent on a stable and pacified environment for efficient production and exchange. The Sangha could provide the legitimation for political leaders and bureaucrats who either did not have suitable ascriptive status or desired to increase their innovatory power against some traditional elite.

The supportive relationship between Buddhism and the developing state reached a climax in the third century b.c., with an event which determinatively affected the subsequent history of Buddhism. The expansion of the state of Magadha, which had begun in the sixth century b.c., culminated in the founding of the Mauryan empire, a patrimonially governed centralized bureaucracy which dominated the subcontinent. The third ruler of this empire, King Aoka, who acceded to the throne about 270 b.c., converted to Buddhism after completing the military consolidation of his territorial holdings. He then issued a pacifistic ideology grounded on the universal achievement-based principles common to the Buddhist lay ethic and most of the other Indian religions. This ecumenical ideology, along with an autobiography of his own spiritual transformation from military coercer to pious layman, was inscribed on stones and pillars and promulgated by emissaries throughout the Indian subcontinent and beyond. Its goal was clearly not only to legitimize the innovatory authority of the royal house but also to provide a wider cultural base for a more viable social system. It exhorts all men in the empire to cooperative pursuit of socially and economically efficient virtues. It discourages the practice of archaic sacrificial and magical ceremonials, thus undercutting traditional religious customs that reinforced politically troublesome local solidarities and supported an entrenched class of archaic religious practitioners. The ideology makes no specific mention of brhma caste criteria for social integration, urging only that brhmas be shown the same respect as other religious leaders.

Although Aoka did not institute Buddhism as the state religion, he promoted Buddhist missionary movements, which spilled over the borders into other landsmost importantly into southeast Asia. Several of his edicts indicate that he tried to unify the Sangha and stem schismatic tendencies which threatened its effective support of the goals of the state. He may have instituted a doctrinal reform by convening a third council at the capital city of Ptaliputra, which then became the basis for the Theravdin orthodoxy that was carried to Ceylon and the southeast Asian mainland. But sectarian schisms in India persisted, for the doctrinal and institutional reasons noted above.

Within fifty years after Aokas death the Mauryan empire collapsed under a multitude of pressuresbarbarian invasions, economic decline, internal political conflict, and a resurgence of brhma power. Subsequently, the ascriptive principles of the caste system were further rationalized. The kings responsibility was increasingly tied to the maintenance of the social order in accordance with caste criteria, thus forming the permanent social base for the emergence of normative Hinduism. The specifics of Buddhist nonascriptive social theory remained only peripherally influentialallowing for occasional nontraditional legitimation of invading monarchs and their courts most notably among the Greeks, the Skas and Pahlavas, and the Kuas.

Mahyna Buddhism did not emerge identifiably as a self-conscious movement with its own distinctive literature and institutions until the first century a.d. Its earliest strasheld to contain the true and restored teachings of the Buddhacannot be dated with certainty before the beginning of the Christian era, and there is some indication of Western and Iranian influence on their doctrine and symbolism. However, many prominent Mahyna principles have their roots in the issues raised at the second council of Vai, which culminated in the schism of the Mahsarighika school. Its doctrines and those developed by other forerunners of the Mahyna represented liberalizing solutions to cumulative tensions which had been present within the Sangha almost from the very beginning. Particularly controversial were the hardened dichotomy between the laity and the monastic elite and disagreements regarding the right of lay access to the full religious goal.

The issues at stake centered on the traditional conservative conception of monastic perfection, ideally embodied in the Arhant, the fully perfected monk who attains complete enlightenment only at the end of the long and arduous pursuit of self-perfection demanded by the Yoga. This ideal was held by liberals to be a selfish distortion of the original teaching, violating the Buddhas compassion for all men. In its place they introduced a new conception of spiritual perfectionthe ideal of the Bodhisattva (being of enlightenment). The term, which was originally used chiefly to denote previous incarnations of the historical Buddha, was universalized. In its new configuration it means one who, although worthy of Nirvana, sacrifices this ultimate satisfaction in order to help all sentient creatures with acts of love and compassion. All men are inherently capable of filling this role. It is not necessarily a monastic category, and the Arhant is lower on the scale of perfection.

This innovation significantly undercut the rigidities of the class distinction between monk and layman. Although monasticism continued as a central institution, the Bodhisattva ideal opened the soteriology to new symbolic forms, beliefs, and practices. It facilitated popular diffusion and provided the basis for new theistic and philosophical developments, reflected in the principal Mahyna stras and schools. Equally important was the doctrinal affirmation of the divinity of the Buddha. He is not only the historical teacher; he is an omnipresent deity, an eternal spiritual being and force. This allowed for further rationalizations of the popular theistic movements.

The Perfection of Wisdom stras are among the most important theoretical formulations of Mahyna soteriology. The Bodhisattvas distinctive marks are loving compassion and wisdom. This wisdom and its perfection are related not only to self-sacrificing love but also to a more accurate understanding of the real nature of Nirva. It is not an otherworldly goal, in polarity with the phenomenal world. This is a Hinayna distortion, which ironically reduces Nirvna to an empirical spatiotemporal object and reinforces the desire inimical to salvation. Nirvna is beyond all phenomenal and conceptual polaritiesvoid and empty (ya). As one approaches inward realization of this truth and experiences enlightened insight, all distinctions between Nirvna and the world are obliterated. One lives with pure, egoless compassion.

The emptiness motif in the Wisdom stras was developed by the philosopher Ngrjuna, founder of the Mdhyamika school. He evolved a negational logic designed to break the inveterate tendency of the finite human mind to impose spatiotemporal categories on the supreme spiritual ideal. The other major philosophical schoolthe Vijnnavda (or Yogcra)based its teachings on stras developed around idealistic conceptions: all objective perceptions are illusory projections of the mind. Salvation is achieved by exhausting the source of dualistic consciousness and sensory perception through a Yoga which leads to union with the purity of being.

The philosophical schools reached extraordinary heights of exaltation and subtlety. They liberated the mystical ideal and soteriology from their scholastic bondage, attracted many intellectuals, and provided new principles for theoretical development of Mahyna universalism. But the bulk of Mahyna practice found its popular social base through theistic means. The heavens were filled with saving Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, who transferred their own merit to the believer in response to prayer, provided richly differentiated objects for cultic worship, and satisfied a wide range of personal affective needs. Theistic piety inspired important artistic achievements, beginning perhaps as early as the second century b.c., in the friezes of the Bhrhut and Snch topes, and culminating in the Buddha statuary produced by the Mathur and Gandhra schoolsthe latter clearly influenced by GrecoRoman art forms.

Among many efforts to systematize this theistic profusion one of the most important was the formulation of the Trikya (three bodies) Buddhology. Here the Buddha exists in his eternal essence as a supreme heavenly deity and in worldly manifestations. He is both the absolute ground of being and the actional agent of salvation. He interpenetrates all discrete phenomena, assuring the universal presence of the Buddha-nature among all creatures, without distinction. This theory provided an integral basis for formal and functional differentiation of symbolic resources, and it was at the same time a dynamic metaphysic which could be adjusted to new social and cultural pressures.

Within the immensely rich theistic literature of Mahyna there are several important stras which became the basis of the most popular cults and schools in China and Japan. The Lotus of the Good Law purports to reveal the ultimate teaching of the Buddha kyamuni, the transcendent father of all worlds, whose love bridges all finite limitations. The devotee is saved by faith in this stra itself. There is a suggestion of sectarian exclusiveness in the dogma that this stra alone embodies the ekayna (one vehicle)the only efficacious means of salvation, which thus exhausts all other doctrines.

More radical are the Land of Bliss stras. Here Amitbha Buddha presides over a heavenly paradisethe pure landavailable to the faithful through the power of his grace. Eschatological and sectarian motifs appear, stressing the utter uselessness of all techniques of self-salvation in a world of utter degeneracy and emphasizing the need to rely absolutely on Amitbha.

Though Mahyna produced little in the way of systematic economic or political theory, there are some exceptions which deserve mention because of their demonstrable influence in China and Japan. The Exposition of Vimalakrti glorifies the virtues of a paradigmatic layman who not only pursues a life of rational economic gain and sophisticated worldly well-being but simultaneously achieves a spiritual perfection excelling that of the most distinguished monks. In the area of political theory the Stra of the Excellent Golden Light, written some time prior to the expansion of the Gupta empire (319540), outlines a modified doctrine of divine kingship. The king is called devaputra (son of the gods), a designation current in the Hindu theory of kingship, but he has no insulated cultic status. He stands under the Buddhas law and is obliged to promote universal peace and social order or by judgment of the gods forgo his right to ruleobviously a sanction for revolt. The patrimonial theory of kingship remained dominantly contractual. Only rarely did the incarnational Bodhisattva principle lend itself to caesaropapist or theocratic pretensions in India. Problems of social stratification receive only passing attention. Caste is presupposed as an institutional reality, and one looks in vain for a systematic critique comparable to that found in the scriptures of the early schools.

The missionary diffusion of Mahyna was greatly facilitated by a remarkable principle of rationalization which allowed for almost unlimited adaptability to given conditions. This was the idea of the Buddhas upyakaualya (skill-in-means) the ability to adjust teachings and institutions to the needs of all sorts and conditions of men through any means available. It was identified with the Buddhas universal love, and, combined with the conviction that all phenomenal forms are illusory and void, it allowed for expedient use of new techniques to further the message of salvation. It cut through traditional boundaries, textual literalism, orthodox formulations, and monastic regulations with remarkable innovatory power and carried the teaching forward, however adumbrated and transformed.

The assimilative diversity of popular Mahyna did not mark the end of the development of Buddhism in India but rather led almost imperceptibly to a metamorphosis. Beginning recognizably in the sixth and seventh centuries a.d. there took place an upsurge of a vast new repertoire of magical, ritualistic, and erotic symbolism, which formed the basis for what is commonly called Tantric Buddhism. Its distinguishing institutional characteristic was the communication through an intimate masterdisciple relationship of doctrines and practices contained in the Buddhist Tantras (esoteric texts) and held to be the Buddhas most potent teachings, reserved for the initiate alone.

In content, Tantric Buddhism is fused in many areas almost indistinguishably with Mahyna doctrines and archaic and magical Hinduism. Cryptic obscurities were deliberately imposed on the texts to make them inscrutable except to the gnostic elite. But it took a number of identifiable forms, the most dramatic of which was Vajrayna (thunderbolt vehicle). Vajrayna had its metaphysical roots in the supposition that the dynamic spiritual and natural powers of the universe are driven by interaction between male and female elements, of which man himself is a microcosm. Its mythological and symbolic base was in a pantheon of paired deities, male and female, whose sacred potency, already latent in the human body, was magically evoked through an actional Yoga of ritualistic meditations, formulas (mantra), and gestures (mudr) and frequently through sexual intercourse, which occasionally included radical antinomian behavior. The inward vitality of the sacred life force is realized most powerfully in sexual union, because there nonduality is experienced in full psychophysical perfection.

The philosophical justification for these developments was derived from adaptations of Yogcra and Mdhyamika theory: since the objective phenomenal world is fundamentally identical with the spiritual universe of emptiness or is at most an illusory projection of the mind, the conclusion was drawn that all forms are not only devoid of real moral distinctions but, also, may serve as expedient means to an undifferentiated spiritual end: the overcoming of the illusory sense of duality between the phenomenal and spiritual world. For the adept it is not only necessary to say that there is no good or evil; it must be proved in an active way. The traditional morality is violated as behavior formerly regarded as reprehensible is found to speed the realization of nonduality.

Many Tantric sects practiced these rites only symbolically and in certain casesmost notably in the Sahajayna (innate vehicle) school produced works of great ethical exaltation. The Mantrayna (true-word vehicle) school, which became influential in China and Japan, remained a rational paragon of restrained magico-religious esotericism. The social origins and class stratification of Tantric Buddhism are almost impossible to determine. Tantric Hinduism, also, was in vogue during this period, and its popularity suggests that a wide-ranging democracy of magical esotericism had broken through stereotyped pressures resulting from the development of state-controlled orthodox institutions during the Gupta era. In the sixth and seventh centuries there were sporadic persecutions of Buddhism, which may have promoted esoteric withdrawal.

After the tenth century a.d. Buddhism began a perceptible decline, for reasons which are still far from clear. The Mahyna philosophical schools became increasingly preoccupied with abstruse theoretical issues and hairsplitting polemics. In time theistic Mahyna and Tantric Buddhism became hardly distinguishable from the increasingly luxuriant garden of Hinduism. The great medieval Hindu philosopher akara successfully incorporated the strong points of Buddhist philosophy in a decisive synthesis. Buddhist monasteries, schools, and cults began to lose their popular foundation, and we can see the slow but sure absorption of its symbolism, intellectual leadership, and laity into the richness of what tienne Lamotte has called Ihindouisme ambiant. The Buddha was represented as one among many incarnations of the Hindu god Visnu. The final blow came with the TurkoMuslim invasions in the twelfth century. Offended by monasticism in principle, shocked by polytheistic Mahyna and Tantrism, and coveting the wealth of the monasteries, the invaders systematically extirpated Buddhism by force. It was not to return as a significant institutional reality for eight hundred years.

Despite their stark contrast in doctrine and practice, the divergent missionary movements of Theravda Buddhism into the lands of southeast Asia and of Tantric Buddhism into Tibet hide similarities which reveal the deeper potency of Buddhist universalism. In both cases Buddhism became the official state church and provided the religious base not only for evolutionary advances but also for long-lasting and relatively stable societies. In both cases Buddhism was introduced under favorable ecological, cultural, and political circumstances by rulers who controlled relatively small, homogeneous land areas and polities grounded on primitive and archaic religions. They saw in Buddhism an opportunity to innovate and to provide a broader religious base for legitimation and social integration.

With respect to the churchstate relationship however, in Tibet this evolutionary movement finally took the form of a theocracy based on a unique rationalization of Mahyna and Tantric incarnational theology; while in southeast Asia the Theravdawith its class division between celibate monk and layman and its highly routinized, orthodox version of the classical traditionwas able to maintain a structural distinction between church and state which had important consequences for later institutional developments.

In coordination with Aokas political and ideological universalism, Theravda missions had penetrated southeast Asia by the end of the third century b.c., most importantly in Ceylon, where Theravda was instituted as the official religion of the state. Ceylon became the chief citadel for Theravdin orthodoxy and its continued diffusion throughout the mainland. In all cases the introduction of Theravda facilitated the development of more highly differentiated polities by freeing societal resources from their embeddedness in limited traditional and ascriptive ties. Moreover, the two-class system had certain advantages. The king was a lay defender of the faith, working cooperatively with the superior charismatic and educative power of the monastic order, which provided state chaplains, missionaries, and teachers who crossed traditional boundary lines and created a new cultural milieu. The specialized performance of these tasks by the Sangha and the structural distinction between church and state also allowed for the formation of secular bureaucracies.

This rational rapprochement between the secular authorities of the state and the monastic leadership of Theravda in southeast Asia did not take place without significant changes in the values and institutions of the ancient Indian Sagha, particularly in those factors which had precipitated its earlier sectarian instability. The radical soteriological independence of the individual monk was placed under routine controls by the introduction of a hierarchy of scholastic distinctions that marked out a chronological path through which the monk progressed toward the ultimate goal. This included grades of perfection based on seniority and routine acquisition of appropriate knowledge. Many of these modifications already appear in later portions of the Vinaya and in the Theravdin Abhidhamma and commentaries. This provided more real space and time for the individual monk to perform worldly tasks without being stigmatized as a spiritual weakling. In addition, in Ceylon the structure of monastic authority was redefined in a way which sets it off strikingly from the early mandate interdicting all forms of centralized ecclesiastical control. We find new rationalizations of the legitimacy of patriarchal authority. A uniform line of charismatic successors to the Buddhas authority was used to justify hierarchical control of the monastic orders, approaching that of a unified church backed up by the power of the state. Finally, a doctrinal orthodoxy was established. The key text is the Kathvatthu, reputedly promulgated under King Aokas supervision and contained in the Abhidhamma. It simply declares 252 non-Theravdin teachings heretical, with minimal discussion of the issues at stake. These relatively new dogmas and lines of authority now allowed for the definition of other essential forms. The councils at Rjagha, Vaill, and Paaliputra were approved as officially binding. At the fourth Theravdin council, in 25 b.c., the threefold canon of scriptures was established as the basis for a uniform ecclesiastical law.

In this newly stabilized form Theravda was located on solid institutional and doctrinal ground, from which it could more effectively serve the goals of the state. The four noble truths, the precepts, and the other rational socioeconomic and political teachings set generalized standards for interpersonal and intergroup relations at all levels of society.

In Ceylon the Sangha was partially fused with existing feudal institutions, forming a monastic landlordism pre-empting more than one-third of the land. But it also taught necessary technical skills and norms and provided a wider sphere for social consensus and the religious legitimation of the polity.

On the mainlandto take Thai as an example the monarchs of some of the early Thai kingdoms which emerged in the mid-thirteenth century supported the Theravdin Sagha not only for internal integration but also for the acculturation of conquered non-Thai groups. The structurally differentiated status of the Sangha later facilitated the formation of a civil bureaucracy, which became the basis for Thai administration up to modern times. Specialized departments were set up under the titular rule of royal princes, with the actual administration performed by civilian officials. The Sangha was headed by a state-appointed patriarch, who coordinated the activities of the Sangha with the needs of the state, maintaining an important sphere for the management of tensions and the mediation of conflicting pressures from both sides. Although hereditary ascription, including discriminatory laws and penalties, remained an important integrative principle, the system was considerably opened to individual achievement because access to the civilian bureaucracy and the religious hierarchy was based on free education, provided by village monks. In addition, all young males were expected (as they still are) to spend at least several months living as novices in training with the monastic community. In general the Theravdin system represented a qualitative advance over the primitive and archaic systems which preceded it.

In Tibet, Buddhism provided equally important evolutionary guidance and ecclesiastical support, chiefly through the medium of Mahyna and Tantric values and under cultural conditions which resulted in a unique synthesis. The economy was agricultural and pastoral, with little in the way of commercial exchange and mobility. The native religion was a primitive magical animism (Bnism), marked by a labyrinthian demonolatry and controlled by Bnist shamans, who specialized in manipulatory magic, necromancy, divination, and exorcism. In the early seventh century a.d. Yogcra teaching was introduced to the royal court by the monarch of a newly formed patrimonial state, but it was not until the eighth century, when Tantric missionaries arrived from Bengal, that the real cultural breakthrough occurred. Tantric success was due in part to the inherent grass-roots appeal of its theistic cosmologies and magical practices to those already steeped in the native religion. But compared with Bnism it provided a more highly differentiated and psychologically liberating system of beliefs and practices. The literate Buddhist clergy were armed with a charisma which overwhelmed local chiefs, sorcerers, and demons alike. The native deities were subordinated to the superior power of the Buddhist pantheon, and in time ethical standards were at least partially reformed and universalized through the karmic theodicy. Typically, many primitive indigenous practices were assimilated and placed under a suitable socializing hierarchy. Religious resources soon included a wide range of additional Indian Mahyna and Hnayna materials, and the monasteries became centers for the systematic translation and study of texts.

Authority was maintained by patriarchal succession, and the noncelibate Vajrayna tradition, with its sexual-sacramental rationale, encouraged the monks to take spouses. This resulted in the institution of a hereditary monastic elite, which undermined and finally destroyed the secular monarchy itself. By the thirteenth century Tibet was controlled by lamas (elders), who ruled from their fortified lamaseries and dominated all political, economic, and religious activities. Theocratic power was hardened by an alliance with the emerging Mongol empire.

However, with the collapse of the Mongol empire in the fourteenth century, the inner resources of Buddhism found new creative outlets and produced a remarkable reforming movement. The monk Tsoh-Kha-pa, who initiated this reform, emerges as a genuine prophetic figure. He was a specialist in Mdhyamika negational philosophy and in the rules of the Vinaya, and he aimed at the elimination of Vajrayna abuses and the restoration of monastic celibacy, discipline, and rational ethics. He organized the Ge-lug-pa (virtuous sect), the yellow church. The color yellow signified his purifying reforms against the Vajrayna practices of the traditional red church, which soon lost its position of political power.

The reassertion of monastic celibacy in combination with the theocratic principle of political organization precipitated another series of innovations in the fifteenth century. Since patriarchal authority could no longer be defined by hereditary succession, charismatic legitimacy was maintained through a unique rationalization of incarnational theory: each of the chief lamas in the clerical hierarchy was held to be a worldly incarnation of a divine Bodhisattva, reborn as an infant in a lay household shortly after the preceding lama died. His spirit transmigrated into the newborn child, whose legitimacy was determined through elaborate rites of divination. The child was then trained in the monastery, under rigorous supervision. Theocratic authority was distributed between the Dalai Lama, who served as temporal ruler, and the Panchen Lama, who was authoritative in all doctrinal matters.

The metaphysical base of this system was further routinized by an emanational theology in which an original creator Buddha (dibuddha) produced and controlled all subdeities and discrete empirical forms. This was not only a soteriological hierarchy but a paradigm for the organization of the state, representing the order of the ecclesiastical bureaucracy and the organic participation of various subsects and all the people in the spiritual power of the chief lamas.

The decisive factor affecting the history of Buddhism in China was its confrontation with the religious values and institutions of a high civilization that differed markedly from the ascetic, otherworldly orientation of Indian Buddhism. The Buddhist world view made its own unique contributions to Chinese culture, while at the same time undergoing acculturationa process that produced a new if not always stable synthesis of Indian and Chinese values.

In China during the first century a.d., Buddhism was confined mainly to foreign communities in the northern commercial cities. The Buddha was worshiped popularly as one among many deities considered worthy of petition and propitiation, and it was not until the end of the second century, with the arrival of Mahyna missionaries and texts, that systematic propagation was undertaken. Buddhisms deeper values and institutions began to assume relatively clear definition and to find a social base among members of the gentry.

The penetration of Buddhism was enhanced by the severe political and economic disorders which occurred at the end of the Later Han dynasty (a.d. 25220). In this situation of general social breakdown, Buddhism provided therapeutic answers to pressing questions about the meaning of the times and of life itself, unanswerable within the indigenous religious framework. Han Confucianism formed the basis for a highly rational political system, and its ethic had immense integrative strength. However, its cosmological metaphysic was designed to reinforce worldly institutions, obligations, and goals. Awareness of the meaning of the self and the world and of the ambiguities of life was sometimes profound, as with Mencius and Chuang-tzu, but self-reflection and inward cultivation were aimed at better performance of the li (proper social action), rather than at personal salvation.

Taoism, with its naturalistic mysticism, provided an important outlet for the socially induced tensions and the pressures of conventional civilization. Equally significant was the hsen-hseh (mysterious learning), an esoteric gnosis with a comparatively sophisticated metaphysic. But hsen-hseh appears as a metaphysical capstone to Confucianism; and cultic Taoism was dominantly shamanisticproviding magical techniques and recipes for immortality in this world, not the next. Buddhism was something very different. With its devaluation of phenomenal life and rich repertoire of otherworldly symbolism and soteriologies, it placed infinite worth on the legitimacy of personal striving for salvation at the cost of all worldly concerns. By comparison the indigenous religions and philosophies were eminently life-affirming and naturalistic.

The Buddhist monastery, however worldly in fact, served as the institutional setting for fulltime pursuit of an otherworldly goal. Despite important similarities between them, the Buddhist monk and the Taoist recluse, the retired gentleman, could not be mistaken for each other. Even more striking was the stark contrast between the monk and the ideal Confucian gentleman, the chn-tzu. The decisive and ultimately victorious opponents of Buddhism in China were the Confucian literati. Their categorical affirmation of the inherent value of the phenomenal world and of the need for clearly structured human obligations and rational social order was deeply violated by the ideal of the celibate, ascetic monk who abandons the world, his family, and the principle of filial piety for the sake of an unknown, incomprehensible reward. The monastic ideal was regarded by many Confucians as an immense threat to the family, to the state, and to every sacred value.

The social disturbances at the end of the Han dynasty extended into the period of the Three Kingdoms and Six Dynasties (220589). In the early part of the fourth century there were a series of barbarian invasions and settlements in the north which provoked a mass migration of Han gentry to the south. This long-lasting cultural split was important for the subsequent development of Buddhism in China. In the north, amid the chaos of the times, Buddhism was a relatively calm oasis of religious and social stability. The Hunnic warlords found in Buddhism the means of religious legitimation and of establishing their own political identity on a wide cultural base which broke through traditional social fissures. The meritmaking ethic and magical therapy were valuable for expiating past sins, gaining practical ends, and sanctioning desired social standards, which still remained profoundly Confucian in depth despite the decimation of the literati.

Under state sponsorship a systematic and remarkably disciplined translation of Buddhist texts was undertaken, introducing many new stras and commentaries, around which schools and cults began to form. Among the first were the Tien-tai, based on the Lotus Stra, and the San-lun, which centered on the Perfection of Wisdom stras and Mdhyamika materials. Popular theistic cults included the worship of many Bodhisattvas. However, by the fifth century the entrenched status of the monastic ordersfree from taxation and corvehad resulted in internal abuses which, from the viewpoint of the state, destroyed their rational cultural and integrative functions. Many of the monasteries had accumulated vast wealth and properties. They were regarded as sanctuaries for those who wanted to avoid secular obligations including the transfer of land titles to avoid taxationand as hotbeds of immorality and political subversion. As a result, efforts were made to break the power of the Sangha and to place it more directly under state control. A caesaropapist fusion of church and state was contemplated by the emperor of the Northern Wei. It was suggested that he declare himself an incarnate Buddha and thus pre-empt the charismatic authority and power of the order. The Sangha was able to resist this effort because the northern dynasties were inherently too unstable for a theocratic synthesis.

More successful was the effort to control the Sangha by systematic reorganization and occasional persecution. A clerical bureaucracy in the Confucian pattern was superimposed on the monastic orders to guarantee rational internal regulation; and persecutions initiated in a.d. 446 and 574 deprived the monasteries of much of their property, wealth, and personnel. However, these acts of coercion had important consequences for the development of the Pure Land cultintensifying the emphasis on eschatological symbolism and the need for salvation through faith in Amitbhas grace alone and deepening its social grounding and universalism.

In the south the dynasties remained Chinese, and political and economic conditions were more stable. The primary cultural and ideological leader-ship remained dominantly in the hands of the Confucian literati, although Neo-Taoism was strongly represented at court. The leading Buddhist monks were for the most part learned, Confucian-trained intellectuals prepared to deal with Taoist and Confucian teachings in depth. They deliberately sought to maintain the political independence of the Sangha, while at the same time synthesizing and enrichening its soteriology in an endeavor to meet the spiritual and social needs of the laity. This independence of mind and synthetic flexibility are best typified by Hui-yan (334416). His monastery was a richly Sinified center of BuddhistConfucian teaching. He was both an expert in the Confucian liespecially the mourning ritesand the traditional founder of the Pure Land school. In order to stabilize the lay ethic, he stressed the moral efficacy of the karmic metaphysic and insisted that the laity observe the five relationships and the law of land. Paradoxically, his rational accommodation of Buddhist teaching to Confucian norms was mixed with a strong sense of the independent dignity of the monk in contrast to the claims of the state cult. With remarkable courage he refused to conform to the traditional court ritual venerating the sacredness of the emperor. In a superb quasi-prophetic treatise entitled A Monk Does Not Bow Down Before a King, he argued that the monk does not lack loyalty or filial piety but has a higher loyalty to the universal Buddhist law, to which all men are subject.

On the whole, however, the bifurcation between the soteriological status of monk and layman prevented the formation of a principle of secular or lay social criticism. Lay patrons were expected to conform humbly to the given political values of the state, and in the last analysis the Sangrias power in both the north and south was dependent on the attitude of the patrimonial monarch, which might range from pious support to savage persecution, depending on utilitarian need or personal whim.

The conquest of the south and the unification of China in a.d. 589 under the Sui dynasty was followed by a deliberate effort on the part of the Sui rulers to use the three major religions coordinately to attain a higher level of cultural unity. Buddhism not only supplied the religious imagery but also the ideology behind the conquests of the founder of the Sui. He deliberately drew on the Buddhist traditions about King Aoka and justified the use of force by infusing it with cultic imagery: we regard the weapons of war as having become like the offerings of incense and flowers presented to the Buddha . Also of value was the psychological conditioning of the army through Buddhist-inspired emphasis on the otherworldly paradise and the trivial consequences of bodily wounds and death itself.

The Buddhist monasteries, patronized by wealthy aristocratic families, were important links between upper and lower status groups. They implemented a pietistic economic justice by distributing the wealth among the poora rational contribution in a time of low economic mobility. State supervision was tight. Monks were required to hold government-approved certificates of ordination and to submit to the supervision of a state-appointed Vinaya master.

In this situation of new political stability, which extended into the Tang dynasty (a.d. 618907), Buddhism underwent a remarkable institutional flowering. The Tang capital was a great center of Sino-Buddhist art and ceremonial, gilding the power of the royal Son of Heaven with suitable charismatic and aesthetic beauty. The provinces and villages were dominated by Buddhist temples and staffed with clergy who tended to the personal affairs of the faithful, simultaneously reinforcing wider social solidarity.

By the eighth century the diffusion of Buddhism had in many ways broken through many of the old particularisms and created a relatively unified Buddhist culture, moderating the severity of the ferocious penal codes and promoting many charitable works. The major Buddhist philosophical schoolsnow emerging in full strengthprovided varied outlets for personal choice and intellectual and soteriological satisfaction. These schools did not develop primarily out of institutional schism or sectarian dissent. Instead, they were formed around the teachings of one or more of the Indian stras, commentaries, and doctrinal systems expounded in China by a master and his designated successors. Confronted as the scholars were with the immense profusion of source materials, their practical goal was to reconcile and harmonize the texts. Some of the schools were based dominantly on the literature of the major Indian philosophical schools, Mdhyamika and Vijnnavda. But others, like Tien-tai and Hua-yen, had no specific Indian institutional counterpart except that implied by the existence of their key stras, around which they catalogued the other sources. Membership in the philosophical schools was necessarily limited to a relatively select literate group, although Tientai had an extensive lay following, and Pure Land for the reasons noted abovewas inherently capable of wide popular diffusion.

The most remarkable synthesis of Chinese and Indian values was achieved in the Meditation school of Chan (Zen). While it was based on the autosoteriological principles of yogic action, its leadership developed a unique meditative technique, which stressed practical, nondiscursive, and naturalistic media for attaining enlightenment. Its teaching was conveyed through a master-disciple relationship founded rigidly on the principle of patriarchal succession, but the school split into two main sects in the seventh century. The Tsaotung emphasized a gradual approach, including routine textual study in the traditional fashion, while the Lin-chi adopted an approach in which all residuals of abstract intellectualism, received texts, and dogmas were abandoned in favor of new techniques. Most notable was the public case (kan in Japanese), a method of question and answer designed to shock the routine patterns of thought that inhibit intuitive insight and the realization of the Buddha nature latent in every man.

Although the Meditation school retained much of the traditional monastic discipline, the essential teaching was communicated largely without ecclesiastical or textual encumbrances. This proved helpful not only in facilitating missionary mobility but also in surviving persecutions which destroyed the edifices, property, and literature of the more traditional schools. The Meditation masters frequently required their disciples to do manual labor, and the antinomian potentials of the teaching were held in check by adherence to the Confucian ethic. In its practicality and its validation of the natural world by the very act of transcending it, there is much of native Chinese naturalism and mystical Taoism. The school exercised considerable influence on the arts and aesthetic values by stressing the inner spiritual depths of the natural form and act.

Buddhism reached its zenith in China during the eighth century. But in the latter part of the Tang it began to weaken. The main factors in this decline were the rise of Taoist political power in the royal court and the renewed importance of Confucianism among the gentry, including the restoration of the bureaucratic examination system under new Confucian leadership. Internal rebellions and barbarian pressures on the frontiers contributed to the collapse of the great family systems on which Buddhism had relied. Equally important was the fact that once again the Buddhist temples and monasteries had become entrenched centers of irrational economic and political power, which from the viewpoint of the state outweighed their cultural contributions. In a.d. 845 a massive persecution was instituted during whichaccording to the Emperor Wuover 44,000 temples and monasteries were demolished and their properties confiscated, releasing millions of acres of land and their laborers. Monks and nuns were compelled to return to productive lay occupations.

This disastrous deinstitutionalization of Buddhism in the late Tang was capped in the Sung (9601279) by the Neo-Confucian reform, which effectively broke the back of Buddhist intellectual pre-eminence in philosophy and placed Confucianism on a new and metaphysically satisfying base. It represents an attack on the Buddhist world view, while at the same time appropriating from Buddhism not only much of its deeper philosophical orientation but also a new concern for the individual and questions of personal meaning. In the philosophical perspective of the great Neo-Confucian thinker Chu Hsi (11301200), understanding leads to a salutary enlightenment. This new image of the Confucian sage encroached on the unique role of the Buddhist monk.

Specifically, the Neo-Confucian attack on Buddhism was in two directions. First, there was an assault on the idea that, since the world is in constant change and flux, it is nothing but meaningless suffering and illusion. On the contrary, all change shows order and permanence in the larger process if not in particular things. Second, there was an attack on the idea that the world is empty and that one should turn away from outer sensations and progressively realize the artificiality not only of the world but also of the minds assertion of the independent reality of the world and the mind. On the contrary, instead of turning from the world, one must investigate its principles and discover its norms, as the basis for the active correction of worldly imperfection.

By the end of the Sung dynasty Buddhism lost much of its intellectual social grounding. The Mongols supported Tibetan Lamaism and Tantrism, as did the Manchus (16441911), for political reasons, but the long association of Buddhism with barbarian dynasties contributed to the general revulsion against it which characterized much of later Chinese intellectual thought. Monasticism continued, but under the closest government supervision. The Buddhist clergy were relegated to the service of popular religious needs and competed with the Taoist shamans for pre-eminence in magical therapy. Their main role was to pray for the souls of the dead, while the Taoists were specialists in the exorcism of demons and sickness. Individuals seeking their aid were not classified as Buddhists or Taoists but simply as Chinese consulting specialists who were essentially without congregations. A residue of Buddhist lay piety remained in several secret societiesmost notably the White Lotus Society, which served largely as a low-level Gemeinschaft organization with little in the way of real devotional fervor or religious universalism.

Japan had not participated independently in the cultural revolutions of the first millennium b.c. For Japan, like Tibet and southeast Asia, this transition occurred much later, in the sixth and seventh centuries a.d., under the impact of Sino-Buddhist values and institutions imported from Korea.

At first Buddhism was valued primarily for its magical power and its prestige as the symbol of the great civilization of China. The real breakthrough to its deeper resources was initiated by one of the greatest figures in Japanese history, Prince Shtoku (573621). Shtoku assumed the regency at a time when there was growing strife between the leading clans over imperial succession. He converted to Buddhism as a layman and, with the assistance of Korean monks, began to reconstruct his society on the broader ethical and cultural base provided by the new values. The innovatory significance of this conversion is suggested by a passage in one of the stra commentaries attributed to him: The world is falseonly the Buddha is true In this ecstatic affirmation of the fundamental principle of world rejection, he appears to have taken the first step in the process of liberating his society from the burden of the archaic institutions which surrounded him. His reconstructive enterprise was spelled out in a new ideology, embodied in a 17-article constitution a fusion of Buddhist universalism and Confucian ethics.

Shtoku actually ruled from the monastery, availing himself of its legitimation and the leverage provided by the monastic order. He sent embassies to China to bring back knowledge of Chinese civilization, which became the basis for the later Taika reform and codes based on Tang law, land systems, and bureaucratic principles.

In the Nara period (709 to 784) Buddhist doctrine found institutional expression in newly imported schools, representing both Hnayna and Mahyna teachings, including the Mdhyamika (Sanron) and Vijnnavda (Hoss). Buddhism dominated the religious life of the royal court and was patronized through the building of temples and monasteries and in other acts of merit-making piety. It provided important ceremonial media for reinforcing court solidarity. Significant contributions to state ideology were made by some of the more politically useful stras: The Lotus of the Good Law not only represented the unity of all forms of soteriological action in the one vehicle but also had a potential affinity for symbolizing national unity, which gave it a permanent place in Buddhist political theory. In 741 Emperor Shmu ordered copies of the Stra of the Excellent Golden Light sent to all the provinces. He directed the building of provincial temples, staffed them with suitable personnel, and built a central shrine to house the immense statue of the Lochana Buddha. By the mid-eighth century Buddhism was the cultic center and metaphysical base of state authority.

However, the Sangha itself began to gain new political powera process which culminated in an effort to institute a Buddhist theocracy under a master of the Hoss sect. This was finally blocked by opposing forces in the royal court, and at the close of the Nara and the beginning of the Heian period (794 to 1185) the Nara clergy was significantly discredited. Emperor Kammu deliberately undertook to dissociate the court from the Nara schools by moving the capital bodily to Kyoto and adopting the term heian (peace, tranquillity) to express his new political and cultural goals. He also encouraged the formation of a new Buddhist monastic order, under the leadership of Saich (767822), a reforming monk who had earlier withdrawn in disgust from the worldly meshes of Nara Buddhism. Saich established his own charismatic and doctrinal independence by studying with Tien-tai (Tendai) monks in China. He centered his teaching on the Lotus Stra and required his monks to undergo 12 years of study and discipline under the rules of the Vinaya. His specific social aim was to prepare them to assume positions of responsible leadership in joint support of the monastic order and the state.

With Kammus death in a.d. 806, the new emperor asserted his own patrimonial independence by promoting a new teaching, expounded by Kkai (Kb Daishi), a monk of aristocratic Japanese lineage who had studied in China and returned with Tantric doctrines culled from the Mantrayna (Chen-yen) school. Kkai, unquestionably a man of immense intellectual and artistic abilities, founded Shingonthe Japanese version of this school. Its esoteric teachings, rich ceremonial, and aesthetically satisfying symbolism appealed to the royal court. Shingon claimed to incorporate not only all the major Buddhist doctrines but also Confucianism, Taoism, and Brahmanism, forming a hierarchial system arranged in ten stages of perfection and capped by the esoteric mysteries. It thus provided an eclectic system of beliefs and practices capable of wide-ranging social penetration, which could be accommodated to the given social hierarchy through extension of the highest esoteric privileges to the elite. Shingons synthetic potential also found one of its most important expressions in dual Shinto, in which Shinto gods were designated Bodhisattvas in an effort to form a unified cultic framework.

The syncretic power and popularity of Shingon moved Saich and his successor, Ennin (794 964), to institute a Tendai esotericism, based chiefly on Ennins studies in China. But Tendai itself was victimized by a sectarian disruption stemming principally from a dispute over the right of patriarchal succession which developed when the emperor selected a blood relative of the aristocratic Kkai as abbot of the order. The conflict produced one of the most tragic periods in the history of Japanese Buddhism. The two camps not only split into hostile religious sects but also, in coordination with dominant clan-based feudal developments, formed fortresses of warrior-monks, who engaged in violent internecine warfare. During the medieval period this became a widespread characteristic. These hostilities were exacerbated by the fact that personal prestige and political status depended jointly on education in one of the monasteries and the monasterys respective position vis--vis royal or clan approval. Clan conflict was frequently defined along sectarian lines, with the great families supporting one feudal monastery against another. Equally important was the freewheeling legitimation allowed by the syncretic richness of the esoteric teachingsincluding suitable Shinto deities to signify the solidarity of each monastic fortress. The esoteric repertoire also gave rise to the Vajrayna sexual sacramentalism of the Tachikawa schoola heretical movement bitterly opposed by Shingon leaders and ultimately suppressed by imperial order.

In all of this the resurgent Buddhism of the early Heian seemed to have undergone a compromising worldly domestication. However, toward the end of the Heian period, amid increasingly violent clan wars and social disruptions, there were countervailing forces at work. In the Heian court, clearly under the influence of Buddhism, we find the emergence of a self-reflective poetry, literature, and drama marked by an extraordinary sophistication of mood and expression. Awareness of the transience of life and the melancholy of impermanent beauty was coupled with symbolism of withdrawal and a nostalgia for the tranquillity of the past. This easily degenerated into sentimentality and became a sign of courtly refinement, but nevertheless it signified a growing uneasiness and a renewed sense of human finitude and guilt.

The feudal wars finally resulted in the overthrow of the old Kyoto aristocracy and the installation of military rule under the Kamakura shgunate (11921333). However, effective stabilization of the society did not take place until the Tokugawa period, and during the intervening four centuries Japan continued to be devastated by protracted warfare. In this situation of deepening gloom and pessimism the energies of Buddhism were once again restored, in a new breakthrough which touched all social strata. Liberated from aristocratic ties to the defunct Kyoto court, it expressed its inherent universalism in ways which still dominate Japanese religious life today. The most important new movement was Pure Land Buddhism. The soteriology was basically the same as in the Chinese case. Self-salvation is impossible. The single efficacious act is the Nembutsu, the invocation and fervent repetition of Amidas (Amitbhas) namea practice already introduced earlier by Ennin.

The institutionalization of Pure Land in Japan was promoted by three unorthodox Tendai priests, Kuya (903972), Genshin (9421017), and Rynin (10711132). Kya left the monastery to preach to the masses and promote charitable public works. His missionary zeal even moved him to try to evangelize the primitive Ainus. Genshin popularized Pure Land in his book The Essentials of Salvation. Rynin expounded the teaching in songs and liturgy, intoning the Nembutsu and urging the unity of all men in the faith. His converts included monks, aristocrats, and common laity alike. Subsequent developments were even more radical. Ippen (12391289) followed the tradition of personal evangelism, preaching and singing in Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples about the omnipresence of Amidas compassion with a universalism which transcended all sectarian differences.

The sudden increase in the popularity of Pure Land during this period of hardship suggests that for the first time the meaning of the human situationnot merely the immediate conditions of personal well-beingwas called into question on a large scale. There was an increasing obsession with the idea that the world is hell and the human situation totally corrupt. Although it is clear that for many the heavenly paradise of the pure land was an affirmation of worldly pleasures, there were practices symptomatic of deeper stresses. People of all classes practiced ascetic vigils and fasts while concentrating on Amidas compassionate image. There were radical acts of physical self-mortificationfor example, gifts of a finger, hand, or arm to Amida or religious suicides by burning or drowningall indicative of deep disturbance.

Hnen (11331212) and Shinran (11731262) were responsible for the major forms of Pure Land, which still exist today. Prior to their efforts the images of Amida were to be found in the temples of almost every sect, and the Nembutsu had no orthodox exclusiveness. But Hnen insisted on the inherent superiority of Pure Land. His radical sectarianism and his success in winning converts resulted in persecution and exile. His disciple Shinran went further: mans total sinfulness means that calling on Amidas name is a useless effort toward merit making unless it is done out of grace-given faith and gratitude. Suffering and sin are the preconditions for personal salvation: If the good are saved, how much more the wicked. Monastic celibacy and the precepts are ineffectual and must be abandoned. The warrior, hunter, thief, murderer, prostituteall are saved through faith alone. Shinran held that monastic celibacy was not required, and he formed the True Pure Land sect (Jdo Shin) in reaction to some of the more conservative members of Hnens group, who still held to the celibate ideal and other traditional vows. The new sect was organized around Shinrans lineal descendants.

One of the consequences of Pure Land radicalism was that it provoked a counterreformation which brought new rigor to the Nara sects and reform movements within Shingon and Tendai. The most important reformer was Nichiren (12221282), a Tendai monk born the son of a fisherman, who took deep pride in his low birth and prophetic role. His reforming message was based on a call to return to the teaching of the Lotus Stra. The goal of his mission was a paradoxical combination of evangelical universalism, radical sectarianism, and fierce nationalism, demanding the cultural and political unification of Japan around Buddhism through faith in the Lotus alone. His position was sufficiently radical for him to form a new school, and his criticism of the incumbent regime resulted in the imposition on him of the death sentence, which was finally commuted to exile. His suffering he interpreted as inherently in keeping with the Buddhas message, and his disciples continued missionary activity despite continuous persecution, particularly during the Tokugawa shgunate.

Zen Buddhism was the third major movement to emerge out of the Kamakura matrix, although it did not reach full strength until the Ashikaga shgunate (1338e1573) and after. In its soteriology it was the reverse of the Pure Land and Nichiren sects, and it did not become equally popular, although it was immensely appealing to many individuals for whom neither otherworldly theism nor ascetic withdrawal were meaningful forms of religious action. It was successfully transplanted to Japan by Eisai (11411215) and Dgen (12001253). Dissatisfied with the condition of Tendai Buddhism, Eisai left for Sung China, where he studied with a Lin-chi (Rinzai) master. After returning to Japan he settled in Kamakura, where his practical teaching found popular acceptance among the new warrior aristocracy. Later he went to Kyoto, with the intention of blending both Shingon and Tendai esotericism with his doctrine. His alliance with the new political order and his compromise with the other sects were major factors in the successful institutionalization of Zen in Japan.

Here is the original post:
Buddhism facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com ...

Chinese Theravada Buddhism is in no position to serve as a tool of soft power for the state.

By Zi Yang for The Diplomat

August 15, 2017

For centuries Yunnan has served as Chinas gateway to Southeast Asia. Besides trade, an important component of this linkage is the exchange of religion and religious groups, in this case Theravada Buddhism. Since its 7th century arrival in Yunnan via Myanmar, Theravada Buddhism has retained a position of deep influence among the Dai, Blang, and Palaung nationalities of the region.

Today, Theravada Buddhism remains a significant cultural linkage between China and Southeast Asia. Countries with the most Theravada Buddhists Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia also happen to be key states on Chinas land and maritime silk road initiative. Cultivating ties with Theravada Buddhist countries therefore makes sense in projecting a warmer and softer image of China, in addition to allowing China access to powerful members of the sangha that are not only venerated community leaders, but also in some instances policy advisors to high decision-makers.

But the general limits of Chinese Theravada Buddhism seriously undercut any soft power initiative overseas.

To begin with, Theravada is the smallest school of Buddhism in China. Compared to Mahayana and Tibetan Buddhism, which have millions of followers across large swaths of the country, Theravada Buddhisms influence is confined to border regions near Myanmar and Laos.

Moreover, Theravada Buddhism suffered terribly after the arrival of communism. In the name of anti-feudalism, temples, pagodas, and Buddha statues were damaged or outright destroyed. Monks were defrocked and persecuted, while all Buddhist activities were banned.

Although state-led oppression started in the late 1950s, these measures reached a climax during the Cultural Revolution. Precious palm-leaf manuscripts were burned to ashes. Everywhere in the Theravada country stood abandoned temples and ruined pagodas. The Xishuangbanna General Buddhist Temple, Chinas largest Theravada temple founded in the 8th century, was totally destroyed.

Like all other faiths, Theravada Buddhism experienced a revival after the perilous Cultural Revolution years. But this revitalization came slowly. While the rebuilding of Buddhist temples was allowed again, local governments refused to return temple-owned lands confiscated during the Mao years. Although monks can study the scriptures again, they were placed under the close watch of local state religious affairs administrations, which control all activities within the monkhood.

At present, Theravada Buddhism in China is in a state of stagnation when compared to the flourishing developments in neighboring countries. For one, there is a severe shortage of monks. There is only one monk available for every two of Yunnans Theravada temples. Due to the shortage, many temples had to shut their gates to worshipers except during major Buddhist holidays. The phenomenon of empty temples is quite haunting. 18.8 percent of Xishuangbanna Prefectures temples stand empty. In Puer and Lincang it is about 40 percent. While in Dehong Prefecture, the number jumps to 90.1 percent, and in Mang City, 98.2 percent.

Foreign monks from Myanmar and Laos are often invited to Yunnan temples in order to fulfill the shortage. However, the government views these outsiders with distrust because of their lack of political reliability. Trained outside China, foreign monks are not filtered through the rigid political indoctrination system that requires all monks to voice support for the supremacy of the Chinese Communist Party, commitment to the socialist path, national unity, and ethnic harmony. The party expects monks to serve as propagandists, while foreign monks have little to no conception regarding this matter.

Besides the political factors and the shortage of monks, the lack of official funding and quality Buddhist schools are also a problem.

Every year, the state allocates billions in renovating Tibetan Buddhist temples and educating Tibetan clerics. The same cannot be said for Theravada Buddhism. Unlike the rebellious Tibetans, ethnic followers of Theravada Buddhism are considered Chinas model minorities. Despite cultural differences between, say, the Dai and the Han, the former never agitated for secession. Even with ethnic kinsmen across the border, the Dai never showed any intention to break away. While this creates fewer problems for the state, it brings in less money for Theravada temples, as opposed to official attempts to buy Tibetan support through patronizing Tibetan Buddhism.

There are only three schools in China that offer Theravada education. But they all suffer from funding issues. In addition, the quality of education is inferior compared to major Theravada institutions in Thailand, for example. In fact, it is the dream of many young novices to complete their higher education at one of Thailands world-class Buddhist universities, Mahachulalongkornrajavidyalaya University or Mahamakut Buddhist University. There have been talks of building Chinas first advanced-level Pali-language school in Yunnan since 2012, but nothing has come about except the purchase of a plot of land.

In short, Chinese Theravada Buddhism is in no position to serve as a soft power agent given its underdevelopment. State policies show that government bureaucrats probably never even recognized the value of Theravada Buddhism in benefiting Chinas relations with the outside world. Public diplomacy does not work in a system where monks must get official approval for everything, be it travelling overseas or hosting a simple religious event while abroad. Sadly, Chinese Theravada Buddhism has always been on the periphery of the Theravada world, and it looks like it will stay there for the foreseeable future.

Zi Yang is a researcher and consultant on China affairs. He covers Chinese politics, security, and emerging markets. Zi holds a M.A. from Georgetown University and a B.A. from George Mason University. Follow him on Twitter @MrZiYang.

Read the original post:
The Soft Power Limits of Chinese Theravada Buddhism - The Diplomat

A mere three years after completing her residency training in 2011, surgeon Carla Haack found herself in the throes of job burnout. She had been devoting her life to the hospital, working 14-hour days including weekends for months at a time. Often the opportunity to eat a meal wouldn't arise until the end of the long work day.

You could have taken the textbook definition of burnout and stuck it on me. I was miserable, and the work became unsustainable for me, said Haack, a general and acute care surgeon at Emory University Hospital. I was exhausted, depleted and probably had some diagnostic features of depression.

As a result of giving everything to the care of her patients, she ended up with nothing left for herself. Haack had even thought about leaving the practice. The combination of long hours, the increasing clerical demands of medicine and constant worries about patients' health led to symptoms of burnout.

Haack represents a growing number of physicians experiencing job burnout, characterized by emotional exhaustion, feelings of cynicism and a low sense of personal accomplishment. A 2011 survey by the Mayo Clinic found that nearly half of physicians in the United States have at least one symptom of burnout, and the phenomenon is more common among doctors than other professions. A type of burnout called compassion fatigue often affects health-care professionals and can result in a loss of empathy for patients, emotional numbing and a sense of no control.

This can have a detrimental effect on patient outcomes. Studies have found that higher levels of physician burnout correspond to more medical errors, which represent the third leading cause of death in the United States.

To combat physician burnout, some medical schools have launched programs to teach soft skills to better equip their doctors for today's stressful health-care environment. Learning compassion, empathy and resilience that speak to the human service challenges of the job have helped many individuals rediscover the meaning of medicine and why they became a doctor in the first place.

Since 2014, Emory has offered cognitively based compassion training (CBCT) courses free of charge for staff, faculty and students at the medical school. Each course runs for 10 weeks, meets once a week in person and also includes at-home exercises. Enrollment has grown every year, with a total of 171 faculty/staff members and 239 medical students having completed the course.

CBCT draws from traditions of Tibetan Buddhism mind training that have been secularized with a focus on compassion and well-being. The course begins with meditative exercises that emphasize self-compassion, then asks students to expand these emotions to their loved ones, strangers and finally difficult people. Each class combines didactic teaching and guided meditation.

A study on second-year medical students at Emory found that those randomized to CBCT reported increased compassion along with decreased loneliness and depression as compared with a control group. The greatest impact of CBCT occurred in students who came into the course with high levels of depression, who maintained their compassion throughout the semester. Those with similar levels of depression in the control group experienced a loss in compassion in the same time frame.

Medical students are this really unique population that suffers from incredibly high rates of depression, suicidal ideation and burnout, said study author Jennifer Mascaro, a biological anthropologist at Emory. Not surprisingly, they also seem to suffer a decrease in empathy and compassion during training. It's hard to feel compassion when you're just trying to keep your head above water.

An eight-week program at Stanford Medicine, called Compassion Cultivation Training (CCT), similarly combines traditional meditation practices with contemporary psychology and scientific research. The training involves daily guided meditation, breathing practices, and a weekly two-hour class with lecture and discussion. While CCT is open to members of the medical school and public, it does require a registration fee of $395.

James Doty, a Stanford neurosurgeon and director of the Center for Compassion and Altruism Research and Education,and his colleagues have studied aspects of CCT not only for health-care providers but also for people living with chronic pain and post-traumatic stress disorder. A randomized controlled trial of CCT found that adults who took the course showed significant improvements in all three domains of compassion compassion for others, receiving compassion from others and self-compassion as compared with a control group.

Similar programs exist for medical students and faculty at Massachusetts General Hospital, the University of Virginia School of Nursing and Georgetown University School of Medicine. Medical schools and hospitals are increasingly investing in compassion and empathy training with the hopes to combat burnout in providers but also for any downstream benefits that patients may receive. Patient-perceived physician empathy improves patient satisfaction and compliance, while burnout is associated with an increased risk of medical errors and malpractice.

When a health-care provider is present and connecting, what happens? Patients' anxiety is decreased, they become calm and this is all simply as a result of human connection, Doty said. So if we create an environment where patients feel that they're being truly cared for and that they're not just another cog in the wheel, it really changes everything.

After completing the CBCT course earlier this year, Haack has already felt a greater level of engagement with work. While the long hours and paperwork do persist, compassion training has allowed her to exercise the self-care she had been lacking for years.

Being a surgeon is one of those situations where somebody trusts you and puts their life in your hands, which is both a privilege and an incredible responsibility, Haack said. The class has already made a profound difference, and I've learned that having a genuine desire for someone to be happy and free of suffering does not mean that I have to carry their pain around with me.

Read more:

Fathers sing more to daughters and roughhouse with sons, study finds

WHO creates controversial reserve list of antibiotics for superbug threats

As bike commuting soars, so do injuries. Annual medical costs are now in the billions.

See the original post:
Tibetan Buddhism-based 'compassion' training for doctors targets burnout - Washington Post

Twin Peaks Blue Rose team Agent Tammy Preston, Agent Albert Rosenfield, and Deputy Director Gordon Cole face the darkness of Coopers double in an earlier third-season episode. Screenshot via Showtime.

Twin Peaks eccentric, upstanding FBI Special Agent Dale Cooper may well have been on to something when, twenty-five years ago, he tried to employ deductive technique, Tibetan method, instinct, and luck in unraveling the mystery of Laura Palmers murder. That was way back in the shows third episode, Zen, or the Skill to Catch a Killer (1990). The mysteries in Twin Peaks currently running third season (subtitle: The Return) have only multiplied, along with the very existence of Dale Cooper, for it seems there are now two Coopers roaming the earth.

[Ill stop here to say something that maybe should go without saying, given that last sentence: talking about Twin Peaks is tricky. It wont make sense if you havent been watching, and it might not make sense even if you have, not in any traditional meaning of sense, at least. Plus, theres the problem of spoilers. Well, Ill do my best.]

This notion of double-Coopers, and doubles in general, again, relates the show to a bit of Buddhist thinking specifically, a Tibetan word: tulpa.

When FBI Agent Albert Rosenfield (played by the recently departed Miguel Ferrer) imparts to Agent Tammy Preston (Chrysta Bell) where the name for Blue Rose cases come from like X-Files, Blue Rose cases are infused with the supernatural and paranormal he tells her of the first-ever such case, years ago, in which a woman named Lois Duffy manifested in two forms at once. One, Albert tells us, says I am like the Blue Rose, is shot, and then vanishes.

Albert asks Tammy to parse the meaning of this use of blue rose. Its not something found in nature, she replies. Its something conjured a tulpa. Albert nods in approval.

So: whats a tulpa? Heres Wikipedias definition:

Tulpa, nirmita, or thoughtform, is a concept in mysticism of a being or object which is created through spiritual or mental powers. The term comes from Tibetan emanation or manifestation. Modern practitioners use the term to refer to a type of imaginary friend.

Indeed, just as Lois Duffys body (or, rather, one of them) disappeared; so too have we been seeing bodies appear and vanish throughout this series of Twin Peaks. Sometimes, theyve seemed to come in and out of thin air, materializing in the shows otherworldly realm known as the Black Lodge. Or, they might manifest in the real world, as Agent Dale Cooper in place of a lookalike named Dougie Jones has, while another, more nefarious emanation of Cooper known as Mr. C. roams about on business that is anything but upstanding.

All this, we can be sure, is mystical business, with roots in something far older than the first Blue Rose case. (Is it significant, too, that Twin Peaks is a translation of Shuang-feng, home for thirty years to the fourth patriarch of Chan Buddhism in China? Nahhh.) In recalling and relaying a dream thats riddled with doubles and, we gather, clues FBI Deputy Director Gordon Cole, played by Twin Peaks director David Lynch, quotes an ancient phrase from the Upanishads, just as Lynch, an evangelizer for Transcendental Meditation, likes to do: We are like the dreamer who dreams and then lives in the dream.

This notion of questioning what is dream and what is reality is one often asked by Buddhists, too: Regard all dharmas that is, phenomena as dreams, goes one of Atishas famed mind-training slogans. As for the idea of the thoughtform, it in fact comes to us by way of a Buddhist text one that Agent Dale Cooper was seemingly able to quote from memory, as Laura Palmers father Leland died in Coopers arms. Wikipedia, again: The term thoughtform is used as early as 1927 in Evans-Wentz translation of the Tibetan Book of the Dead, and has its roots in Tibetan Buddhism and Bon. Just who, and what, in the Twin Peaks universe are thought-forms? Just whose body is a mind-made body, as a tulpa might be defined?

This being Twin Peaks, such questions may well remain forever unanswered. In the meantime, as we wait and see, the best thing might be to regard it all as a dream. But Ill leave you with this definition of nirmita, the above-mentioned corollary to tulpa, as rendered in The Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism:

In Sanksrit, conjured, referring to something perceived by the sensory organs to be real but that is in fact illusory, like the moon on the surface of a lake or the water in a mirage. The term is often associated in Buddhist literature with the various doubles the Buddha conjures of himself in order to bring varying types of sentient beings to liberation.

Read more:
Twin Peaks, in key new episode, nods to Buddhism again - Lion's Roar

Buddhism, religion and philosophy that developed from the teachings of the Buddha (Sanskrit: Awakened One), a teacher who lived in northern India between the mid-6th and mid-4th centuries bce (before the Common Era). Spreading from India to Central and Southeast Asia, China, Korea, and Japan, Buddhism has played a central role in the spiritual, cultural, and social life of Asia, and during the 20th century it spread to the West.

Ancient Buddhist scripture and doctrine developed in several closely related literary languages of ancient India, especially in Pali and Sanskrit. In this article Pali and Sanskrit words that have gained currency in English are treated as English words and are rendered in the form in which they appear in English-language dictionaries. Exceptions occur in special circumstancesas, for example, in the case of the Sanskrit term dharma (Pali: dhamma), which has meanings that are not usually associated with the term dharma as it is often used in English. Pali forms are given in the sections on the core teachings of early Buddhism that are reconstructed primarily from Pali texts and in sections that deal with Buddhist traditions in which the primary sacred language is Pali. Sanskrit forms are given in the sections that deal with Buddhist traditions whose primary sacred language is Sanskrit and in other sections that deal with traditions whose primary sacred texts were translated from Sanskrit into a Central or East Asian language such as Tibetan or Chinese.

Buddhism arose in northeastern India sometime between the late 6th century and the early 4th century bce, a period of great social change and intense religious activity. There is disagreement among scholars about the dates of the Buddhas birth and death. Many modern scholars believe that the historical Buddha lived from about 563 to about 483 bce. Many others believe that he lived about 100 years later (from about 448 to 368 bce). At this time in India, there was much discontent with Brahmanic (Hindu high-caste) sacrifice and ritual. In northwestern India there were ascetics who tried to create a more personal and spiritual religious experience than that found in the Vedas (Hindu sacred scriptures). In the literature that grew out of this movement, the Upanishads, a new emphasis on renunciation and transcendental knowledge can be found. Northeastern India, which was less influenced by Vedic tradition, became the breeding ground of many new sects. Society in this area was troubled by the breakdown of tribal unity and the expansion of several petty kingdoms. Religiously, this was a time of doubt, turmoil, and experimentation.

A proto-Samkhya group (i.e., one based on the Samkhya school of Hinduism founded by Kapila) was already well established in the area. New sects abounded, including various skeptics (e.g., Sanjaya Belatthiputta), atomists (e.g., Pakudha Kaccayana), materialists (e.g., Ajita Kesakambali), and antinomians (i.e., those against rules or lawse.g., Purana Kassapa). The most important sects to arise at the time of the Buddha, however, were the Ajivikas (Ajivakas), who emphasized the rule of fate (niyati), and the Jains, who stressed the need to free the soul from matter. Although the Jains, like the Buddhists, have often been regarded as atheists, their beliefs are actually more complicated. Unlike early Buddhists, both the Ajivikas and the Jains believed in the permanence of the elements that constitute the universe, as well as in the existence of the soul.

Despite the bewildering variety of religious communities, many shared the same vocabularynirvana (transcendent freedom), atman (self or soul), yoga (union), karma (causality), Tathagata (one who has come or one who has thus gone), buddha (enlightened one), samsara (eternal recurrence or becoming), and dhamma (rule or law)and most involved the practice of yoga. According to tradition, the Buddha himself was a yogithat is, a miracle-working ascetic.

Test Your Knowledge

Halloween

Buddhism, like many of the sects that developed in northeastern India at the time, was constituted by the presence of a charismatic teacher, by the teachings this leader promulgated, and by a community of adherents that was often made up of renunciant members and lay supporters. In the case of Buddhism, this pattern is reflected in the Triratnai.e., the Three Jewels of Buddha (the teacher), dharma (the teaching), and sangha (the community).

In the centuries following the founders death, Buddhism developed in two directions represented by two different groups. One was called the Hinayana (Sanskrit: Lesser Vehicle), a term given to it by its Buddhist opponents. This more conservative group, which included what is now called the Theravada (Pali: Way of the Elders) community, compiled versions of the Buddhas teachings that had been preserved in collections called the Sutta Pitaka and the Vinaya Pitaka and retained them as normative. The other major group, which calls itself the Mahayana (Sanskrit: Greater Vehicle), recognized the authority of other teachings that, from the groups point of view, made salvation available to a greater number of people. These supposedly more advanced teachings were expressed in sutras that the Buddha purportedly made available only to his more advanced disciples.

As Buddhism spread, it encountered new currents of thought and religion. In some Mahayana communities, for example, the strict law of karma (the belief that virtuous actions create pleasure in the future and nonvirtuous actions create pain) was modified to accommodate new emphases on the efficacy of ritual actions and devotional practices. During the second half of the 1st millennium ce, a third major Buddhist movement, Vajrayana (Sanskrit: Diamond Vehicle; also called Tantric, or Esoteric, Buddhism), developed in India. This movement was influenced by gnostic and magical currents pervasive at that time, and its aim was to obtain spiritual liberation and purity more speedily.

Despite these vicissitudes, Buddhism did not abandon its basic principles. Instead, they were reinterpreted, rethought, and reformulated in a process that led to the creation of a great body of literature. This literature includes the Pali Tipitaka (Three Baskets)the Sutta Pitaka (Basket of Discourse), which contains the Buddhas sermons; the Vinaya Pitaka (Basket of Discipline), which contains the rule governing the monastic order; and the Abhidhamma Pitaka (Basket of Special [Further] Doctrine), which contains doctrinal systematizations and summaries. These Pali texts have served as the basis for a long and very rich tradition of commentaries that were written and preserved by adherents of the Theravada community. The Mahayana and Vajrayana traditions have accepted as Buddhavachana (the word of the Buddha) many other sutras and tantras, along with extensive treatises and commentaries based on these texts. Consequently, from the first sermon of the Buddha at Sarnath to the most recent derivations, there is an indisputable continuitya development or metamorphosis around a central nucleusby virtue of which Buddhism is differentiated from other religions.

Britannica Lists & Quizzes

The teacher known as the Buddha lived in northern India sometime between the mid-6th and the mid-4th centuries before the Common Era. In ancient India the title buddha referred to an enlightened being who has awakened from the sleep of ignorance and achieved freedom from suffering. According to the various traditions of Buddhism, buddhas have existed in the past and will exist in the future. Some Buddhists believe that there is only one buddha for each historical age, others that all beings will become buddhas because they possess the buddha nature (tathagatagarbha).

The historical figure referred to as the Buddha (whose life is known largely through legend) was born on the northern edge of the Ganges River basin, an area on the periphery of the ancient civilization of North India, in what is today southern Nepal. He is said to have lived for 80 years. His family name was Gautama (in Sanskrit) or Gotama (in Pali), and his given name was Siddhartha (Sanskrit: he who achieves his aim) or Siddhatta (in Pali). He is frequently called Shakyamuni, the sage of the Shakya clan. In Buddhist texts he is most commonly addressed as Bhagavat (often translated as Lord), and he refers to himself as the Tathagata, which can mean both one who has thus come and one who has thus gone. Traditional sources on the date of his deathor, in the language of the tradition, his passage into nirvanarange from 2420 to 290 bce. Scholarship in the 20th century limited that range considerably, with opinion generally divided between those who believed he lived from about 563 to 483 bce and those who believed he lived about a century later.

Information about his life derives largely from Buddhist texts, the earliest of which were produced shortly before the beginning of the Common Era and thus several centuries after his death. According to the traditional accounts, however, the Buddha was born into the ruling Shakya clan and was a member of the Kshatriya, or warrior, caste. His mother, Maha Maya, dreamt one night that an elephant entered her womb, and 10 lunar months later, while she was strolling in the garden of Lumbini, her son emerged from under her right arm. His early life was one of luxury and comfort, and his father protected him from exposure to the ills of the world, including old age, sickness, and death. At age 16 he married the princess Yashodhara, who would eventually bear him a son. At 29, however, the prince had a profound experience when he first observed the suffering of the world while on chariot rides outside the palace. He resolved then to renounce his wealth and family and live the life of an ascetic. During the next six years, he practiced meditation with several teachers and then, with five companions, undertook a life of extreme self-mortification. One day, while bathing in a river, he fainted from weakness and therefore concluded that mortification was not the path to liberation from suffering. Abandoning the life of extreme asceticism, the prince sat in meditation under a tree and received enlightenment, sometimes identified with understanding the Four Noble Truths. For the next 45 years, the Buddha spread his message throughout northeastern India, established orders of monks and nuns, and received the patronage of kings and merchants. At the age of 80, he became seriously ill. He then met with his disciples for the last time to impart his final instructions and passed into nirvana. His body was then cremated and the relics distributed and enshrined in stupas (funerary monuments that usually contained relics), where they would be venerated.

The Buddhas place within the tradition, however, cannot be understood by focusing exclusively on the events of his life and time (even to the extent that they are known). Instead, he must be viewed within the context of Buddhist theories of time and history. Among these theories is the belief that the universe is the product of karma, the law of the cause and effect of actions. The beings of the universe are reborn without beginning in six realms as gods, demigods, humans, animals, ghosts, and hell beings. The cycle of rebirth, called samsara (literally wandering), is regarded as a domain of suffering, and the Buddhists ultimate goal is to escape from that suffering. The means of escape remains unknown until, over the course of millions of lifetimes, a person perfects himself, ultimately gaining the power to discover the path out of samsara and then revealing that path to the world.

A person who has set out to discover the path to freedom from suffering and then to teach it to others is called a bodhisattva. A person who has discovered that path, followed it to its end, and taught it to the world is called a buddha. Buddhas are not reborn after they die but enter a state beyond suffering called nirvana (literally passing away). Because buddhas appear so rarely over the course of time and because only they reveal the path to liberation from suffering, the appearance of a buddha in the world is considered a momentous event.

The story of a particular buddha begins before his birth and extends beyond his death. It encompasses the millions of lives spent on the path toward enlightenment and Buddhahood and the persistence of the buddha through his teachings and his relics after he has passed into nirvana. The historical Buddha is regarded as neither the first nor the last buddha to appear in the world. According to some traditions he is the 7th buddha, according to another he is the 25th, and according to yet another he is the 4th. The next buddha, Maitreya, will appear after Shakyamunis teachings and relics have disappeared from the world.

Sites associated with the Buddhas life became important pilgrimage places, and regions that Buddhism entered long after his deathsuch as Sri Lanka, Kashmir, and Burma (now Myanmar)added narratives of his magical visitations to accounts of his life. Although the Buddha did not leave any written works, various versions of his teachings were preserved orally by his disciples. In the centuries following his death, hundreds of texts (called sutras) were attributed to him and would subsequently be translated into the languages of Asia.

The teaching attributed to the Buddha was transmitted orally by his disciples, prefaced by the phrase evam me sutam (thus have I heard); therefore, it is difficult to say whether or to what extent his discourses have been preserved as they were spoken. They usually allude to the place and time they were preached and to the audience to which they were addressed. Buddhist councils in the first centuries after the Buddhas death attempted to specify which teachings attributed to the Buddha could be considered authentic.

The Buddha based his entire teaching on the fact of human suffering and the ultimately dissatisfying character of human life. Existence is painful. The conditions that make an individual are precisely those that also give rise to dissatisfaction and suffering. Individuality implies limitation; limitation gives rise to desire; and, inevitably, desire causes suffering, since what is desired is transitory.

Living amid the impermanence of everything and being themselves impermanent, human beings search for the way of deliverance, for that which shines beyond the transitoriness of human existencein short, for enlightenment. The Buddhas doctrine offered a way to avoid despair. By following the path taught by the Buddha, the individual can dispel the ignorance that perpetuates this suffering.

According to the Buddha of the early texts, reality, whether of external things or the psychophysical totality of human individuals, consists of a succession and concatenation of microelements called dhammas (these components of reality are not to be confused with dhamma meaning law or teaching). The Buddha departed from traditional Indian thought in not asserting an essential or ultimate reality in things. Moreover, he rejected the existence of the soul as a metaphysical substance, though he recognized the existence of the self as the subject of action in a practical and moral sense. Life is a stream of becoming, a series of manifestations and extinctions. The concept of the individual ego is a popular delusion; the objects with which people identify themselvesfortune, social position, family, body, and even mindare not their true selves. There is nothing permanent, and, if only the permanent deserved to be called the self, or atman, then nothing is self.

To make clear the concept of no-self (anatman), Buddhists set forth the theory of the five aggregates or constituents (khandhas) of human existence: (1) corporeality or physical forms (rupa), (2) feelings or sensations (vedana), (3) ideations (sanna), (4) mental formations or dispositions (sankhara), and (5) consciousness (vinnana). Human existence is only a composite of the five aggregates, none of which is the self or soul. A person is in a process of continuous change, and there is no fixed underlying entity.

The belief in rebirth, or samsara, as a potentially endless series of worldly existences in which every being is caught up was already associated with the doctrine of karma (Sanskrit: karman; literally act or deed) in pre-Buddhist India, and it was accepted by virtually all Buddhist traditions. According to the doctrine, good conduct brings a pleasant and happy result and creates a tendency toward similar good acts, while bad conduct brings an evil result and creates a tendency toward similar evil acts. Some karmic acts bear fruit in the same life in which they are committed, others in the immediately succeeding one, and others in future lives that are more remote. This furnishes the basic context for the moral life.

The acceptance by Buddhists of the teachings of karma and rebirth and the concept of the no-self gives rise to a difficult problem: how can rebirth take place without a permanent subject to be reborn? Indian non-Buddhist philosophers attacked this point in Buddhist thought, and many modern scholars have also considered it to be an insoluble problem. The relation between existences in rebirth has been explained by the analogy of fire, which maintains itself unchanged in appearance and yet is different in every momentwhat may be called the continuity of an ever-changing identity.

Awareness of these fundamental realities led the Buddha to formulate the Four Noble Truths: the truth of misery (dukkha; literally suffering but connoting uneasiness or dissatisfaction), the truth that misery originates within the craving for pleasure and for being or nonbeing (samudaya), the truth that this craving can be eliminated (nirodhu), and the truth that this elimination is the result of following a methodical way or path (magga).

The Buddha, according to the early texts, also discovered the law of dependent origination (paticca-samuppada), whereby one condition arises out of another, which in turn arises out of prior conditions. Every mode of being presupposes another immediately preceding mode from which the subsequent mode derives, in a chain of causes. According to the classical rendering, the 12 links in the chain are: ignorance (avijja), karmic predispositions (sankharas), consciousness (vinnana), form and body (nama-rupa), the five sense organs and the mind (salayatana), contact (phassa), feeling-response (vedana), craving (tanha), grasping for an object (upadana), action toward life (bhava), birth (jati), and old age and death (jaramarana). According to this law, the misery that is bound with sensate existence is accounted for by a methodical chain of causation. Despite a diversity of interpretations, the law of dependent origination of the various aspects of becoming remains fundamentally the same in all schools of Buddhism.

The law of dependent origination, however, raises the question of how one may escape the continually renewed cycle of birth, suffering, and death. It is not enough to know that misery pervades all existence and to know the way in which life evolves; there must also be a means to overcome this process. The means to this end is found in the Eightfold Path, which is constituted by right views, right aspirations, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right meditational attainment.

The aim of Buddhist practice is to be rid of the delusion of ego and thus free oneself from the fetters of this mundane world. One who is successful in doing so is said to have overcome the round of rebirths and to have achieved enlightenment. This is the final goal in most Buddhist traditions, though in some cases (particularly though not exclusively in some Pure Land schools in China and Japan) the attainment of an ultimate paradise or a heavenly abode is not clearly distinguished from the attainment of release.

The living process is again likened to a fire. Its remedy is the extinction of the fire of illusion, passions, and cravings. The Buddha, the Enlightened One, is one who is no longer kindled or inflamed. Many poetic terms are used to describe the state of the enlightened human beingthe harbour of refuge, the cool cave, the place of bliss, the farther shore. The term that has become famous in the West is nirvana, translated as passing away or dying outthat is, the dying out in the heart of the fierce fires of lust, anger, and delusion. But nirvana is not extinction, and indeed the craving for annihilation or nonexistence was expressly repudiated by the Buddha. Buddhists search for salvation, not just nonbeing. Although nirvana is often presented negatively as release from suffering, it is more accurate to describe it in a more positive fashion: as an ultimate goal to be sought and cherished.

In some early texts the Buddha left unanswered certain questions regarding the destiny of persons who have reached this ultimate goal. He even refused to speculate as to whether fully purified saints, after death, continued to exist or ceased to exist. Such questions, he maintained, were not relevant to the practice of the path and could not in any event be answered from within the confines of ordinary human existence. Indeed, he asserted that any discussion of the nature of nirvana would only distort or misrepresent it. But he also asserted with even more insistence that nirvana can be experiencedand experienced in the present existenceby those who, knowing the Buddhist truth, practice the Buddhist path.

View original post here:
Buddhism | Foundations, History, Systems, Mythology ...

Charlotte Business Journal

Two friends, a touch of Buddhism and one new South End restaurant Charlotte Business Journal This South End restaurant aims to bring something different to Charlotte. Think eclectic American fare, a name with ties to Buddhism and two friends driven by a passion to create a unique dining experience. That restaurant, called Bardo, is targeting a ...

Visit link:
Two friends, a touch of Buddhism and one new South End restaurant - Charlotte Business Journal