[Buddha-l] Refuge in what?

[Joy Vriens]

Hi Dan,

How about the non-Pali Buddhas in Buddhism for starters? The Pali Buddha may
have been more "firm and explicit about things he didn't "say", the non-Pali
Buddhas felt less restraint, for better or for worse. A non Pali Buddha
would not have shied away from getting into a conversation about how refuge
works or about the nature of the Buddha in whom/which he takes refuge.

The only thing the Chinese and Tibetan translations of tīrthika show is the
attitude towards other traditions. As does the English translation
"heretical masters". The original word tīrthika didn't have that meaning.
The Pali Buddha had no trouble in teaching the way to Brahma and how to be a
real brahmin and people came to see him to hear his answer to those
questions. He didn't tell them "Sorry yours is an outsider way, or
heretical" or "If you're looking for a Transcendent or for Brahma, please go
to the room across the hall".

Guru Nanak's attempt was not the only one. There are other much less
spectacular possibilities than Gobind Singh's Nihang warrior path. Most of
them are practised while outwardly following more traditional
(politico)religious forms ("hidden yoga"). The advantage (if it worked) of a
lay system (laicité) like the French Republic, makes everyone into a "hidden
yogi" and leaves less room for politicoreligious manifestations in the
public space. Ideally the best of both worlds.

Joy

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:50 PM, Dan Lusthaus <vasubandhu at earthlink.net>wrote:

> > Isn't refuge in the Pali Buddha a bit limited?
>
> Non-Pali Buddhas are not Christian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Jain, Carvaka,
> Ajivika, Hopi, Shingon, Daoist, Confucian, or French (well, maybe there
> will
> be a French Buddha someday).
>
> They are Buddhas. They are not tīrthikas, (The Chinese translation of
> tīrthika is instructive: 外道 wai-dao, a follower of "outsider ways").
>
> Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism, declared there was no such thing as a
> Hindu or a Moslem. He discovered that trying to be neither made him a third
> entity, which came to be called Sikh. Within five generations Sikhs had to
> carry knives (and make that a religious obligation for all males) to
> protect
> themselves from Muslims.
>
> Universals are never as universal as proponents believe. Buddhists (but not
> Hindus, Muslims, et al.) say that.
>
> Dan
>
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>