[Buddha-l] Re: Was Buddha a Buddhist
Benito Carral
bcarral at kungzhi.org
Thu May 25 14:35:23 MDT 2006
Dear Buddha-L friends,
I would like to share with you some additional
thoughts about this topic--I'm sorry I have not time to
develop them, but I'm sure that you will be able to do
it if you wish. :-)
My starting point is that the Buddha was no so
different from other forest wanderers. If we consider
the canonical account of his early practice, we found
that he studied under two well-known teachers. He
didn't understand his own system as a new approach, but
as an improvement of his teacher's ones.
Then if we study what such an improvement was, we
find that it was a question of how much attachment one
discards. To use a well-know conceptualization, the
Buddha thought that his teachers were still attached to
atman, and what he discovered is that there is not
atman, that atman is Brahman.
Of course, I don't think that this was something new
is the forest scene, and I believe that the
"improvement" was a creation of the later tradition.
If we consider now his first teaching to the five
disciples, we can get a clue to understand how the
Buddha was different, he was highly charismatic.
I think that the Buddha's success was based on three
fundamental points (none of them related to doctrinal
innovation), his charisma, his pragmatism (he taught
everyone according to his capacities, without a fixed
Dharma, centered on experience), and his ethical
standard.
I have dealt yet with the issue of his reform of the
Brahmanical tradition because I don't think it was
important. The Buddha was not the only reformer, it was
just what was expected of a forest wanderer. I don't
think this facet of his ministry had much to do with
his success, which I think was based on the three
points I mentioned above.
In short, I don't think that the Buddha was a great
innovator at all, but a very charismatic, pragmatic,
and ethical guy of the forest scene.
Best wishes,
Beni
More information about the buddha-l
mailing list