Reply to Thread New Thread |
10-07-2011, 05:32 AM | #21 |
|
Hi all you lovelies. Apologies for taking so long to get back to you. Am very time poor, but impressed by all the discussion our question has provoked. To put our quote into context, here is a quote from the workbook which is devised and set for us by the examining body OCR:
"Are Buddhist scriptures revealed texts? In most religions, scriptures are considered sacred because they contain the truths revealed by God. Since Buddhists do not believe in a creator God, their scriptures are not considered to be divinely revealed. Some may therefore question whether they can have the same status and authority as scriptures in other traditions. Although Buddhist scriptures are not revealed by God they might be considered to be revealed by the Buddha. Certainly, early scriptures such as the sutta pitaka of the Pali Canon will be viewed in this way. Since the Buddha is a human being, are they still regarded as revealed texts, i.e. texts that reveal ultimate truths that may otherwise be inaccessible? Before revealing the dhamma (truths or teachings) which are recorded in the texts, he had gained enlightenment. He was therefore able to access ultimate truths that are hidden from most people. It could therefore be argued that the texts should be seen as revelations. As such the scriptures are highly respected. They are often kept on stands or shelves, and would not be placed on the floor by most Buddhists. The Buddha did, however, feel that these truths were accessible to others if they followed the correct paths, and he encouraged Buddhists to test his teachings against their own experiences, only accepting them if they were found to be true by other means. This has led to an open and critical approach towards the teachings within the scriptures of Buddhism. FOR DEBATE What do we mean by ‘divine’? If Buddhist scriptures are not revealed by God, can they be regarded as divine? If Buddhist scriptures are not divinely revealed, can they have the same status and importance as scriptures in other religions? How are the scriptures used and studied? Buddhism is a vast tradition, and as such, the use of the scriptures varies tremendously between different Buddhist." |
|
10-07-2011, 06:32 AM | #22 |
|
Although Buddhist scriptures are not revealed by God they might be considered to be revealed by the Buddha. imo, 'revelation' must be of 'truth' that is independent of subjective experience or subjective creation such a 'revelation' must come from or be 'revealed' by objective reality for example, the reality of gravitation was 'revealed' to Newton when he watched the fall of an apple from a tree Newton did not subjectively create his theory of gravitation, like a musician creates a piece of music instead, it was the apple and gravity itself that 'revealed' the reality of gravity to Newton 'revelation' is the same as a woman taking her clothes off and revealing her body to a young man what is 'revealed' already exists, to be discovered via relevation so when a woman takes off her clothing to the young man and the young man then describes the form of the woman's body to others, which entity does the revelation? is the revelation by the woman who takes off her clothing? or is the revelation by the young man when he describes the form of the woman's body to others? Since the Buddha is a human being, are they still regarded as revealed texts, i.e. texts that reveal ultimate truths that may otherwise be inaccessible? just as gravity revealed itself to Newton, the ultimate truths of [the] conditionality [of suffering], impermanence, unsatisfactoriness & not-self were always accessible and were revealed to the Buddha what was simply required was a mind with the appropriate receptivity for these truths to be revealed please keep in mind, Moses, Jesus, Mohamed (P.B.U.M) and the other prophets were also human beings again, i think it is important to define what or who does the relevation? does God do the revelation? or does the prophet do the revelation? is revelation by God to a prophet? or is relevation the truth of God revealed by the prophet to man? He was therefore able to access ultimate truths that are hidden from most people. the suttas state: It could therefore be argued that the texts should be seen as revelations. the suttas state of the Buddha's enlightenment: The Buddha did, however, feel that these truths were accessible to others if they followed the correct path... but other religions are the same God’s Wisdom Revealed by the Spirit We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. However, as it is written: “What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived”— the things God has prepared for those who love him— these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, for, “Who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ. 1 Corinthians 2 |
|
10-07-2011, 11:39 AM | #23 |
|
Hi all you lovelies. Apologies for taking so long to get back to you. Am very time poor, but impressed by all the discussion our question has provoked. To put our quote into context, here is a quote from the workbook which is devised and set for us by the examining body OCR: Some may therefore question whether they can have the same status and authority as scriptures in other traditions. As does this one. But the Buddha's teachings carry authority by their veracity, rather than an appeal to a supposed divine "authority". The problem with scriptures and ethical systems that hang on appeals to divine authorities is that they are built on houses of cards. If belief in the supposed divine authority is shaken, if doubt arises, the scriptures and ethical systems that are based upon the belief in a divine authority fall with that belief. A "crisis of faith" becomes a crisis of ethics as well. Not so with the Buddha's teachings, which hold their veracity whether one believes that there are divine entities or not. Although Buddhist scriptures are not revealed by God.... This statement presumes the existence of such an entity. ....they might be considered to be revealed by the Buddha. Perhaps, in that way. But the idea of "revealed" texts or scriptures seems very much a fallacious Appeal to Authority in the first place. Certainly, early scriptures such as the sutta pitaka of the Pali Canon will be viewed in this way. Since the Buddha is a human being, are they still regarded as revealed texts, i.e. texts that reveal ultimate truths that may otherwise be inaccessible? Real can of worms here. Define "ultimate truths". This phrase and the distinction that is made here of the Buddha being a human being (rather than a pre-supposed divine being of some sort) seem to load the question. The Buddha did figure out some relevant "truths" about human nature. But the question seems to play musical definitions with "revealed text", though the idea of "divine revelation" seems to be waiting or hiding in the wings nonetheless. Before revealing the dhamma (truths or teachings) which are recorded in the texts, he had gained enlightenment. The Buddha did not speak of "enlightenment". This was a later contrivance. The Buddha spoke of "Nibbana" (Sanskrit: Nirvana), the "cooling" of the "fires" of suffering. He was therefore able to access ultimate truths that are hidden from most people. Again, this idea of "ultimate" really needs to be clearly defined and explained. The idea of gravity was "hidden" from most people for a long time as well, as was the idea that the planet is round and not flat (something the Tibetans have only recently discovered). Does this hidden/un-hudden-ness make these "revealed ultimate truths" as well? It could therefore be argued that the texts should be seen as revelations. As such the scriptures are highly respected. They are often kept on stands or shelves, and would not be placed on the floor by most Buddhists. Superstitions abound. But at the same time, even now books such as the Nikayas are quite expensive and rather rare, and thus should perhaps be taken better care of than would be usual, at least for someone like me who is hard on everything... The Buddha did, however, feel that these truths were accessible to others if they followed the correct paths, and he encouraged Buddhists to test his teachings against their own experiences, only accepting them if they were found to be true by other means. This has led to an open and critical approach towards the teachings within the scriptures of Buddhism. A much better test of the "status and authority" of the claims and scriptures of any and all religions, by the way. FOR DEBATE What do we mean by ‘divine’? AHHHH -- the idea of "Divine" WAS lurking in the wings! [quote[ If Buddhist scriptures are not revealed by God, can they be regarded as divine? [/quote] Presupposition of a god-entity here again. But the real question is: does "divine" really matter? Or is "divine" just a fallacious Appeal to supposed Authority? THAT is a better question. Any way you cut it, though, one could not call Buddhist scriptures "divine" if "divine" means "revealed by God". Not sure that they could be by any definition of "divine". If Buddhist scriptures are not divinely revealed, can they have the same status and importance as scriptures in other religions? Well, here is the meat and potatoes. Since the Buddha's liberative teachings are universal, timeless, without recourse to superstition or speculative view, and demonstrably effective for any and all, no matter what age or culture, it should be patently obvious that they have far more status and importance than scriptures of other religions that are built on the houses of cards of Appeal to Authority and superstition. How are the scriptures used and studied? Buddhism is a vast tradition, and as such, the use of the scriptures varies tremendously between different Buddhist." This is true. The liberative teachings of the Buddha are best studied objectively and critically, carefully and methodically, and examined both as individual discourses and in relation to each other. They were certainly laid out that way, and there is far more to each of them than meets the eye or can be gleaned from a casual or inattentive skimming. |
|
10-07-2011, 12:36 PM | #24 |
|
Maybe can be the case that the revelation given by the teachings of Buddha are of the kind of revelation as when someone explains how the trick performed by a magician has been done. There is needed understanding and mindfulness about the impermanent and non self characteristic of things. Not the blind faith in something divine but the confidence gotten through the practice of the understood teaching.
|
|
10-08-2011, 05:30 PM | #25 |
|
|
|
10-10-2011, 02:59 AM | #26 |
|
Although Buddhist scriptures are not revealed by God they might be considered to be revealed by the Buddha. Certainly, early scriptures such as the sutta pitaka of the Pali Canon will be viewed in this way. Since the Buddha is a human being, are they still regarded as revealed texts, i.e. texts that reveal ultimate truths that may otherwise be inaccessible? And this is changing the definition of "revealed text" as well. "Musical definitions", if you will. Before revealing the dhamma (truths or teachings) which are recorded in the texts, he had gained enlightenment. He was therefore able to access ultimate truths that are hidden from most people. It could therefore be argued that the texts should be seen as revelations. And, again, this is an equivocation and another change of the meaning of the term "revealed text". |
|
10-27-2011, 04:28 AM | #27 |
|
we are also going to be looking at the Lotus Sutra I hope you are still looking in for information to explore with your class, because I just came across these comments about the Lotus Sutra which might interest you. Its a post from the blog of Ajahn Sujato who is the abbot of a monastery in Australia. Is the Lotus Sutra authentic? "One of our commenters asked about whether the Lotus Sutra was considered authentic according to the Theravadin view. To answer this from the traditional Theravadin point of view, all the Mahayana Sutras are inauthentic in the sense that they were not spoken by the Buddha. Historically, Theravada has tended to take a dim view of Mahayana, regarding it as a mere degeneration of the pure teachings. That the Lotus Sutra and other Mahayana Sutras were not spoken by the Buddha is unanimously supported by modern scholarship. I don’t know of a single academic in the last 150 years who has argued otherwise." Continued : http://sujato.wordpress.com/ . |
|
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|