[Buddha-l] Historical vs Psychological Religious Narratives

[L.S. Cousins]

Hi there, Leigh,

I was wondering the other day what had happened to you.

I think we should be rather careful not to be mislead by the word 
'god'. It has one meaning in the Abrahamic religions and another in 
most forms of polytheism. For the former we are dealing with a 
transcendent being in terms which can really only be conceived after 
the development of the Platonist philosophical tradition. For the 
latter we are dealing with beings of great power, but beings who are 
not necessarily more powerful that e.g. human magicians. Moreover, 
any person or thing of great potency is a god for the latter but not 
for the former. Also the latter gods, even if considered as creator 
gods, do not usually create from nothing.

>My experience with Buddhists raised in Buddhist cultures, rather than
>Western converts, is that the truth of historical narratives can be more
>important to them. For example, the common claim by Tibetan lamas is that
>the Mahayana sutras were actually spoken by Shakyamuni Buddha, and that the
>Vajryana teachings also originate with him. These claims seem to be
>important to them. The biography of Gotama Buddha's life is often the
>introduction to Buddhist teachings, and the claim for the truth of Buddhist
>teachings is at least in part, or rhetorically, grounded in the authority of
>his historical awakening.

I would think that most Theravaadins, even most western followers, 
would consider some kind of historical narrative of the life of the 
Buddha important.

>There is also a connection between belief in the historical biography of
>Buddha, belief in reincarnation, and the enforcement of moral behavior and
>social order through karmic retribution and reward in future lifetimes.

I am more confident that the historical Buddha taught these things 
than I am that he taught the four noble truths, although I tend to 
think that at some point in his long life he taught both.

>On the other hand, Christianity also has psychological narratives, such as
>the concept of original sin, etc. Although I am not familiar with them,
>there must be extensive Christian writings on human psychology, as there are
>on philosophy, that support Christian doctrines of salvation.

There are.

>Perhaps the more key difference between traditional Buddhism and traditional
>theistic religion is the role of a deity in granting salvation through
>petition. The less such claims can be supported by reason and experience,
>the greater the importance of magical events and the divine origin of texts.

Yes, this is clear. There is no transcendent god in Theravaada 
Buddhism nor in some forms of Mahaayaana. So any gods involved are 
simply beings of great power (as above); they can only give material 
help. In general, they have little more ability to advance one on the 
path than other human beings do. But they might help one to get a 
good business deal.

Since their role is peripheral, there is no real problem with 
ignoring them or discarding them - although it is perhaps more fun to 
keep them :-)

Lance Cousins