[Buddha-l] Doxastic minimalism (was: flat earth?)

[Vicente Gonzalez]

Richard Hayes wrote:

RH> I guess there really are many Buddhists who like the idea of a
RH> non-sacred (or at least not especially sacred) and this-worldly approach to
RH> Buddhism.

I agree there is nothing wrong in ignoring the sacred scenography in
Buddhism, specially when already it is rooted in many Buddhist
traditions and sayings of the same Buddha. My complaint is about the
stress of some authors in suppressing some things not because it is
part of their own practice but with the claim these are useless
additions or non valid ways to understand and practice Buddhism.
The world is really big and there are persons of many types.


RH> (I can be excused; I had one grandfather who was a Unitarian,
RH> another who was a Freemason, one grandmother who was a Universalist, another
RH> grandmother who was a Christian Scientist, a father who was a staunch atheist
RH> and a mother who called herself a small-p protestant but refused to get more
RH> specific and never went to any church during my entire childhood. Sacredness
RH> was just not part of my childhood, and I have never felt a need to acquire it
RH> as an adult. I suspect I am not unique in this respect, probably not even
RH> unique among Buddhists.)

from the little of what I know,  Freemasonry is involved with rituals
until the excess. Sometimes it's amazing reading in newspapers 
how some people with that affiliation are claiming their perplexity
in front the modern attraction for the ritual of religions. I'm quite
sympathetic about Freemasonry because their great contributions to the
welfare of common people. About the rest, I don't know well about
Universalism and Christian Scientist. Anyway I'm not sure about the
importance of family inheritances. In my case I'm not against a useful
ritual, and my grandfather was miner and he died blind and with
silicosis with no many faith in God, I suspect. Rest of my family and
myself where also workers without special religion affiliation.

Just I think the ritual becomes unavoidable for the human being
because it starts with any thing. We read inside Pali Canon how the
people gives circles around Buddha and many other similar things.
We know these were courtesy rules but the ritual starts from here.
Ritual is wrong when the ritual becomes a goal in itself or a business
with the transcendence. On the contrary, the ritual can be useful as
any other action, speech or thought. Same happens with the guru way.
It is obvious Buddha was a guru for many people. We read how the people
was not only in agreement with Him as a teacher but also they put their
faith in Him.

Well. so I think these things cannot be ignored before talking about
what is Buddhism and try to suppress these useless additions in a
universal way, as a magical recipe for the western people.

RH> For many (perhaps most Christians) the Biblical narratives, especially those
RH> concerning the crucifixion and resurrection, are of vital importance; if they
RH> were fictitious stories serving as vehicles for some great ideas, something
RH> indispensable would be missing. I cannot think of any narrative in Buddhism
RH> that would be indispensable in quite the same way.

are you sure?. Crucifixion and other episodes are not only an historic
narrative but also a teaching which must be understood. In the
Christian case by means the Grace. In a similar way it happens in
Buddhism by means Prajna, specially in Mahayana.

Another interesting thing are the rationalist approaches to those
narratives. In example, periodically we see several fools pursuing the
Jesus tomb, etc.. That people in their insanity, they arrive to think
that across 2.000 years nobody was aware about the Jesus tomb, and
they suspect it was forgotten in some place as if it was a lighter.

These crazy things are promoted by the Reason hooligans of these
times. Many people thinks these discoveries are of some utility to
know the "truth" of religion or their veracity, However, such waste of
time has social and political consequences, specially in Christianity.
And despite the apparent rationalist approach, these things reinforce
the more fanatic and useless side of Religions. We can remember here
the growing of affiliates to the Opus Dei after Da vinci Code film.


RH> While rebirth (and perhaps other metaphysical narratives) may be dispensable
RH> to many of us, my guess is that none of the four noble truths is dispensable.

well, neither we don't need the kamma philosophy to get a cease.
The point is when the philosophical suppression of rebirth can be so
wrong as the kamma suppression for the people who are using them.

Anyway, if now you go to an Italian event, I hope you will see yourself
succumbing to some gnocchi ritual to validate with your own experience.

best regards,