Does Buddhism require a belief in the supernatural?

[Bricker]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

It is not necessary to believe in samsara. Bottom line. The Buddha never made that part of the doctrine. I just quoted the actual text of the Sutra. This debate is over.

And I just quoted the actual text of the sutra.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Malthus

Heh, from two posts above yours:

Assu Sutta: Tears

You’re misunderstanding the word “transmigration” here. It isn’t a reference to transmigration of souls (which the Buddha didn’t believe in), but to the inherent impermanence of life. That everything is changing and transient, that nothing stays the same, and that this is part of what causes suffering.

[Frylock]

@Bricker

Why don’t you ask Diogenes for some cites?

I haven’t been discussing anything with Diogenes.

[Malthus]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

It is not necessary to believe in samsara. Bottom line. The Buddha never made that part of the doctrine. I just quoted the actual text of the Sutra. This debate is over.

Your quotation does not state the point you are attempting to make, whereas mine (I note, from the same site you used) expressly describes the cyscle of Samsara as the target of liberation.

From a historical analysis:

In spite of the rejection of authority of Vedas, the Buddhism of the Pali canon shares a common heritage with much of Indian philosophy, in particular the Upanishads, insofar as both stress the need for yoga as a means of the realization of the truth and share a basic philosophical vocabulary. The central difference between the two, however, is that in early Buddhist teaching there is no atman with which the yogi is to identify as his true Self. Rather, repeatedly in the Pali canon the doctrine of anatman (Pali: anatta) appears. In the Upanishadic philosophy when one withdraws from the external world, calms the senses and empties the mind one discovers atman, the (true) Self, which is identified with Brahman; this insight liberates from samsara. Contrary to the vedanta view, in the Buddhism of the Pali canon what liberates from samsara is the insight that there is no permanent and abiding self with which to identify; this is the teaching of anatman.

(Emphasis added)

http://www.abu.nb.ca/courses/grphil/EPhil/Buddh.htm

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Bricker

And I just quoted the actual text of the sutra.

And you didn’t understand a word of it.

[Bricker]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

You’re misunderstanding the word “transmigration” here. It isn’t a reference to transmigration of souls (which the Buddha didn’t believe in), but to the inherent impermanence of life. That everything is changing and transient, that nothing stays the same, and that this is part of what causes suffering.

Cite?

Look, Diogenes, you cannot simply assert things as true. You’ve already embarrassed yourself with not knowing about the difference between reincarnation and rebirth (a line of discussion I see you’ve dropped without comment, your usual tactic for avoiding an admission of error) and you’re obviously unclear about how critical samsara is to attaining nibbana. In short, you’re no “expert,” and cannot simply post claims and expect the readers to accept your analysis as gospel. If you have cites, post 'em. Everyone else is managing to.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Bricker

Wow. A link.

And even in your link, he doesn’t limit himself to the cessation of suffering:

But wait – there’s more:

From the cessation of birth.

What exactly does the Buddha mean? Was he advising Kassapa the clothless ascetic to turn back time and not be born?

Or was he advising him to not be reborn?

What did he mean, there, Diogenes?

If you read back further, he’s defining “birth” as essentially synonomous with consciousness. He’s using these words like “birth, aging and death” figuratively. Awareness of those things causes suffering. You should really take a class or something.

[Frylock]

@Bricker

Yes. Cite.

That looks like a pretty conclusiove citation–provided that “(D. 22). T. is the 8th link in the formula of the dependent origination (paṭiccasamuppāda, q.v.)” is constituted by references to foundational Therevada texts. What do “D. 22” and paticcasamuppada" mean? Are these references to passages from foundational texts?

[Bricker]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

And you didn’t understand a word of it.

Another one of those, “Who are you going to believe? Diogenes the Expert, or the quoted text?” moments.

[Bricker]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

If you read back further, he’s defining “birth” as essentially synonomous with consciousness. He’s using these words like “birth, aging and death” figuratively. Awareness of those things causes suffering. You should really take a class or something.

I have. But rather than simply claim I know it because i took a class, I have provided citations to buttress my points.

[Malthus]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

You’re misunderstanding the word “transmigration” here. It isn’t a reference to transmigration of souls (which the Buddha didn’t believe in), but to the inherent impermanence of life. That everything is changing and transient, that nothing stays the same, and that this is part of what causes suffering.

Odd then that the Buddha is stating that you repeatedly experience the deaths of your mom and pop as you transmigrate, shedding in the process more tears than the ocean.

It is true that in Buddhism there is no true, eternal, permanent self - you are as changing as everything else (another source of suffering) - but there is still a ‘you’ that is bound to the wheel. The wheel of Karma, birth and rebirth, Samsara.

[CarnalK]

@Bricker

And yet I have repeatedly offered cites to my points, meaning at the very least that others out there equally endorse my idiotic claims.

You, on the other hand, have relied on your authority as an SDMB “Expert.” A title which you conferred on yourself.

I think he is correct that if you look at the specific text that lays out the Noble Truths, you won’t see “rebirth” in there or directly supernatural stuff. Truths: 1 2 3 4

But you have to disregard a lot of exposition and commentary to say supernatural has nothing to do with it. For example, further along in the very same Sutta that those truths are listed is the text:
Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting the Wheel of Dhamma in Motion

“And, monks, as long as this — my three-round, twelve-permutation knowledge & vision concerning these four noble truths as they have come to be — was not pure, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its deities, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & commonfolk. But as soon as this — my three-round, twelve-permutation knowledge & vision concerning these four noble truths as they have come to be — was truly pure, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its deities, Maras & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & commonfolk. Knowledge & vision arose in me: ‘Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.’”

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Bricker

Cite?

The cite is the text. Read it yourself. Better yet, take a class. You don’t have the slightest idea what you’re talking about.

Look, Diogenes, you cannot simply assert things as true. You’ve already embarrassed yourself with not knowing about the difference between reincarnation and rebirth

There IS no difference. You were wrong, and you continue to make yourself look like a buffoon by insisting that there is. Neither one of those words has any translation into Pali. They are English approximations of the same Pali word.

[treis]

I don’t know what you are talking about Diogenes, but you are way off base here:

At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said: “From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. What do you think, monks: Which is greater, the tears you have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — or the water in the four great oceans?”

“As we understand the Dhamma taught to us by the Blessed One, this is the greater: the tears we have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in the four great oceans.”

"Excellent, monks. Excellent. It is excellent that you thus understand the Dhamma taught by me.

"This is the greater: the tears you have shed while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in the four great oceans.

"Long have you (repeatedly) experienced the death of a mother. The tears you have shed over the death of a mother while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — are greater than the water in the four great oceans.

"Long have you (repeatedly) experienced the death of a father… the death of a brother… the death of a sister… the death of a son… the death of a daughter… loss with regard to relatives… loss with regard to wealth… loss with regard to disease. The tears you have shed over loss with regard to disease while transmigrating & wandering this long, long time — crying & weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — are greater than the water in the four great oceans.

Assu Sutta: Tears

It is clear that the whole point of the Buddha’s teachings is to stop the cycle of death and rebirth through the extinguishing of desire. It’s crystal clear in this text. Each of us has shed more tears than the water in the ocean because we have experience the suffering of many many life times. There is no real way to follow the Buddha’s teachings without accepting the supernatural cycle of death and rebirth.

[Bricker]

@Frylock

That looks like a pretty conclusiove citation–provided that “(D. 22). T. is the 8th link in the formula of the dependent origination (paṭiccasamuppāda, q.v.)” is constituted by references to foundational Therevada texts. What do “D. 22” and paticcasamuppada" mean? Are these references to passages from foundational texts?

Yes, those refer to the tipitaka, or the Pali canon, which is most certainly foundational.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@CarnalK

I think he is correct that if you look at the specific text that lays out the Noble Truths, you won’t see “rebirth” in there or directly supernatural stuff. Truths: 1 2 3 4

But you have to disregard a lot of exposition and commentary to say supernatural has nothing to do with it. For example, further along in the very same Sutta that those truths are listed is the text:
Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta: Setting the Wheel of Dhamma in Motion

There are a lot of optional supernatural beliefs in Buddhism. None of them are necessary, especially not in Zen, which is what I practice, and which is not Theravada anyway, so I don’t know why Bricker thinks he’s making any point at all about Zen in trying to argue his incorrect understanding of Theravada.

[CarnalK]

treis, I think that the problem is that loooong ago Buddhists figured the best way to recruit in a hostile religious environment is to downplay the believing spiritual stuff and upplay the “good way to live” stuff. Diogenes has just bought that hook, line and sinker.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

There is absolutely no requirement to believe in anything supernatural. That’s a fact. Go to any Zen temple and ask them.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@CarnalK

treis, I think that the problem is that loooong ago Buddhists figured the best way to recruit in a hostile religious environment is to downplay the believing spiritual stuff and upplay the “good way to live” stuff. Diogenes has just bought that hook, line and sinker.

It’s not “good way to live” stuff. It’s cognitive discipline. Zen meditation is just exercise for the brain with no more necessary religious component than yoga. You can practice yoga just as a physical activity, or you can practice it as a spiritual discipline. Same with Zen.

[Bricker]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

The cite is the text. Read it yourself. Better yet, take a class. You don’t have the slightest idea what you’re talking about.
There IS no difference. You were wrong, and you continue to make yourself look like a buffoon by insisting that there is. Neither one of those words has any translation into Pali. They are English approximations of the same Pali word.

Why do you think I am focusing on Theravada Buddhism, and disavowing any in-depth knowledge of Zen? It’s because I have taken a class that focused on Theravada Buddhism.

I know there is no covincing the Great Rock of Diogenes.

But I’m also pretty certain that every other person reading this thread knows you’re wrong.