Superstition and attachment
 

Do we have superstition and attachment to rites and rituals in our practice?

Is it helpful or not?

What do you guys think?

Namaste

I think we all go through a process of using various placebos to overcome hindrances and otherwise motivate ourselves in the practice, and any harm in such things will be directly related to the presence of concomitant attachments.

It is helpful for someone, not helpful for someone.
The past, some place, sometime, Buddhism could be continue because of these.
We need core but shell sometime protect the core.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

Thanks guys, some good points raised.

I was just wondering though, whether we can be entirely sure that our rationality alone can encompass all facets of our existence, or whether there are also aspects of it which are on the fringes and beyond?

Would it be fair to say, 'even if there are, so what? - If I can't quantify it, I'd rather forget it'.

Of course, there are also those who claim that belief is the essential ingredient, missing in the purely rational mind. Any milage in this argument I wonder?

Namaste

As recently as January this year there was a 90 reply thread on "angels"
Personally l feel that if we only go with what is 'rational' then we are missing out on a huge part of consciousness.

Yes, I think it is fair... for some people it is. And that is ok.

I do not use "believe" because is can be taken as a blind way of believeing. I like to use "confidence" indicating the difference that it is developed thorugh your own experience.

In Soto Zen tradition we talk a lot about Kung Fu, as a way to develop Inner faith about the path. I feel this is not superstition but a true development that is beyond intelctuality and rationality.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

This is a very good point to think about Frank dear, I have reached a stage where I can conssider this.

Thanks,

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

Personally I've grown to think that superstitions, rites and rituals have mostly very little to do with Buddhism, They're just cultural add-ons.

True but does it necessarily disqualify them?

Could it be a case that one person's superstition is another persons fact?

For example, if everyone agrees that UFOs don't exist but one evening you actually see one land and some little green men getting out, where does that leave you?

Just a thought...http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/wink.gif

Actually, personally I wouldn't agree that UFO's don't exist. Many years ago I saw a huge colored light moving around and hovering...but alas, no cute little green men.http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/green.gif..................... http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ies/saucer.gif

Yeah but, no but... it was just an example!http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ies/saucer.gif

I neither believe nor disbelieve in things until I see them. Why believe in something just because Fred Bloggs says it exists ?

I think one thing is to go with what only is rational, as told by Frank, and other is Superstition. Superstition is superstition and it ends in attachment, but if this is a necesary step from some people to take and start an spiritual path, well... it is ok...

Now, I understand rites and rituals as a way to focus on meditation. They give some sort of significance to what is meant. A preparation for meditation or for a deeper understanding of a teaching beyond rationality.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

Or not....depending on the person taking part. If they're conducted in a foreign language then much of the significance of the ceremony can become bewildering and ineffective to the newcomer.

Yes, I can take that point Aloka dear. In my personal experience many of the meanings are spoken in Japanise during a ceremony, but we have a previous teisho so to explain its meaning and not get lost in a meaningless sort of symbols, as in the case of the Satoris when they were given to us and to me.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...ilies/grin.gif

There's an important difference between ritual and superstition...

Ritual is a methodology and a tool for igniting, refining, and protecting awareness.

Superstition is ignorance of the awareness that the ritual is designed to ignite and protect - it is the projection of ego-manufactured so-called magic, mystery, "spirituality", and religiosity (all delusional states of mind) onto practical realities that one is ignorant of or that aren't clearly understood. Superstition is mental materialism and a masturbatory indulgence in simulacra - very far from the clarity that is ritual's purpose and goal.

It's sometimes said that so-called magic, mystery, "spirituality", and religiosity (ie: superstition) is useful to a certain group of people who are often condescendingly described as "simple"...but I think this is a rationalization that masks a failure to skillfully make the teachings accessible and clear to ordinary people.

Of course Pink dear,

That is what I was trying to mean in # 13 but you have stated it very clearly.

Thanks again,

Pink # 16: "It's sometimes said that so-called magic, mystery, "spirituality", and religiosity (ie: superstition) is useful to a certain group of people who are often condescendingly described as "simple"...but I think this is a rationalization that masks a failure to make the teachings accessible and clear to ordinary people."

True

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...lies/hands.gif

100% agree.

Personally l think it's well worth reflecting on what is "superstition",what is the difference between superstition and 'reality'. Is it not only what the majority 'think'.
Do in fact the majority 'think' or do they just read today's news-paper and that tells them what is true?
People have long recognised that there is an amount of "junk DNA" in our bodies. The arrogance of this attitude is breath-taking.
This "junk" may well be our means of accessing ???

Are for those who want their Buddhism neatly parcelled and served up.
One of the stepping stones to stream entry is abandoning the clinging to "rites and rituals" or "precepts and practises" as described in MN78 and clarified by Thanissaro Bhikku in Stream Entry Part 2: Stream-entry and After

"The fetter of grasping at precepts and practices is often described in the Pali canon with reference to the view that one becomes pure simply through performing rituals or patterns of behavior. This view in turn is related to the notion that one's being is defined by one's actions: if one acts in accordance with clearly defined precepts and practices, one is ipso facto pure. Although the Canon recognizes the importance of precepts and practices in the attaining the stream, the experience of the Deathless shows the person who has attained the stream that one cannot define oneself in terms of those precepts and practices. Thus one continues to follow virtuous practices, but without defining oneself in terms of them.

"Now where do skillful habits cease without trace? Their cessation, too, has been stated: There is the case where a monk is virtuous, but not fashioned of (or: defined by his) virtue. He discerns, as it actually is, the awareness-release & discernment-release where his skillful habits cease without trace."

— MN 78

As always Pink very well expressed.