[Buddha-l] Meditating Buddha

[Joy Vriens]

Richard Nance wrote:

Stephan:

>>Archetypical for Buddhist art is a meditating Buddha. However, one can
>>wonder WHY a Buddha has to meditate, assuming the he/she is enlightened, and
>>enlightenment excludes the necessity of (further) meditation.

And not only archetypal for Buddhist art. Think of representations of 
Jain Tirthankaras. Think of the representation (Mohenjo-Daro) of 
Pashupati, Lord of the animals, sitting in yoga position. Think of the 
famous representation of Cernunnos, the septentrional Lord of the 
animals, sitting in yoga position. The position does have something 
archetypal, but not necessarily Buddhist.

And is the Buddha represented as meditating? The Buddha is holding a 
bowl and touching the earth, or with his hands performing the teaching 
mudra. The Tirthankaras are often sitting with their hands performing 
the jhana mudra, like Amithaba. But even here, are they "meditating", 
"practising" jhana, rather than expressing awakening or balance/peace? 
More architypically, a body in this posture ressembles a mountain, a 
stupa, a symbol of stability and of union between heaven and earth etc.

> These depictions may have been
> created to offer Buddhists -- most of whom are not perfectly awakened
> beings -- models of exemplary conduct. If this is right, then the
> depictions do not simply aim to chart what Buddhas do (or did), but
> what a Buddhist should do if he or she wishes to become (like) a
> Buddha.

Not necessarily. A smiling Buddha representation is not actually 
smiling, assuming a Buddha "still needs to smile", if you allow me to 
misapply and caricature Stephen's suggestion, nor is the representation 
meant as a prescription for Buddhists to smile. I think he simply 
symbolises peace and bliss. Which can work inspiring and is probably 
meant to be exactly that. BTW there can't be that many ways of 
graphically representing someone who is simply there, present, in peace.

Joy