Buddhism: An Introduction · General Buddhism · Theravada · Mahayana · Tibetan · Zen or Ch'an · Other Traditions of Asian Origin · Krishnamurti
Buddhism: An Introduction
I approach Buddhism as a set of practices to try and repeatedly examine for effectiveness in overcoming the suffering (anguish, impermanence, dukkha) inherent in living under the illusion of separation. It is not a set of beliefs which one professes, which one has "faith" in. The historical Buddha himself is not someone to worship as a Saviour or any kind of supernatural being. At best, this Siddhartha Gautama, this "Awakened One," can be looked to for inspiration, as someone to emulate, an ordinary man who, apparently, overcame duality, the sense of self and other.
It is not even necessary to be certain that Gautama existed. And when you're dealing with personages from bygone centuries whose alleged existence is overlain with the hopes and desires of people looking for inspiration and guidance, you are on shaky ground if you do depend on the certainty of their existence. All we know for sure is that we have a record of teachings allegedly from this particular person. It is up to each of us to evaluate the teachings for ourselves and decide if any particular practice is worth trying out.
But much of Buddhism is enveloped with the practices of the particular cultures which took it in. These practices may or may not be complementary to Buddhism; perhaps none are necessary to practice Buddhism. I point this out because many people, like me, grew up with a strong background in Western science and may not bother to consider the ideas of Buddhism because they associate it with the cultural baggage added to it in India, Southeast Asia, Tibet, China, or Japan.
On the other hand, Westerners who come to Buddhism especially because they want the exotic flavor of Asian cultures which have long practiced one form or another of Buddhism may be equally misled, confusing custom with essence. (This is no argument against studying any particular cultural adaptation of Buddhism. If a Tibetan or Thai interpretation works for you, stay with it.)
My bias is to promote books which have 1) a secular outlook, such as Stephen Batchelor's; 2) are more general in nature, such as Jack Kornfield's; or are more innovative, the Zen teachings of Seung Sahn, for example. But the selection in the linked pages includes works from a wide variety of traditions.
Branches of Buddhism
Scholars differ in their classification schemes for the major branches of Buddhism, but in general, Buddhism is classified in two or three groups. The two-group scheme is to divide it into Theravada (Southern Buddhism or "Hinayana") and Mahayana (Northern Buddhism). Theravada is often thought of as the set of practices followed during the time of Gautama himself by his "Sangha" or order of monks and nuns. It is said to be little changed from that time and includes the idea that awakening (enlightenment) is primarily available only to people who leave ordinary life and work diligently for their own "salvation." Theravadins tend to be firmer in the belief that the Buddha was an ordinary man. The name Southern Buddhism has been used since these practices were primarily located in south Asia (India, Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, and Cambodia).
Mahayana Buddhism was a later development. It differs from Theravada in that it includes the concept of the Bodhisattva, an awakened being who, though free from the cycle of existence, vows to remain in earthly form until all sentient beings are saved from suffering. As that statement implies, there can be a greater emphasis on supernatural beings, including cosmic Buddhas, of which the historical Buddha was just one periodic manifestation. Mahayana tends to be more inclusive as well, with greater participation of lay Buddhists. The name Mahayana means "greater vehicle," referring to the more inclusive approach, in contrast to the "Hinayana," or "lesser vehicle" label tagged on the Theravadins. (Since "Hinayana" is considered somewhat derogatory, the name Theravada is usually preferred.) Since Mahayana Buddhism developed most fully north of the Theravadin countries, it is sometimes called Northern Buddhism.
Tibetan Buddhism and Zen are often considered to be part of the Mahayana traditions. But since Tibetan Buddhism incorporated a good deal of the supernatural beliefs of the native Bon religion, it is sometimes considered to be a third branch, known variously as Lamaism (the recognition of "highly evolved" entities in their subsequent lives, lamas, being a distinct feature of the practice), or as Vajrayana, the "Diamond Vehicle," the idea perhaps being that the incorporation of texts, doctrines, and means from both the Theravadins and Mahayanas give it a more powerful cutting edge. The name Tibetan Buddhism is also used, of course, but even before the Tibetan diaspora resulting from the Chinese invasion of Tibet in the 50s, this tradition has existed in Mongolia, Nepal, and Bhutan, in addition to Tibet.
Zen, or Ch'an (as it is known in China), is usually considered a part of Mahayana. But because it stripped away a lot of the rituals and supernatural beliefs of the latter (with some schools adding new layers of ritual of their own), it can be considered distinct. The first Patriarch of Zen, Bodhidharma, emigrated to a China that was deeply steeped in Mahayana traditions of gaining merit through good acts in this life so that one could secure a better rebirth in the next, and slowly, during each successive lifetime, get closer to becoming a Buddha.
The Emperor wanted to know how well he was doing in this regard, and when he heard that an apparently venerable old man from India was present, he asked to see Bodhidharma. The Emperor told the holy man of all the good works he had accomplished, and inquired as to how much merit these works would bring him. Came the famous reply: "No merit." When exasperated by a series of similar responses, the ruler finally asked, "Who is it that stands before me?" the reply he received was, "I don't know."
This exchange exemplifies the Zen mistrust of words. Are they really capable of teaching us anything? Instead, Zen emphasizes direct perception of reality through stopping the flow of words which constantly inhabit our minds. The word "zen" is the Japanese (and now English) version of the Chinese term "ch'an", which was how the Chinese pronounced the Sanskrit "dhyana." The latter simply means "meditation," and meditation in its essence is being fully open to reality—that is, not barricading against it with thoughts, concepts, ideas, beliefs, or any attitude other than complete acceptance.
Because Zen does not necessarily depend on traditional Buddhist texts (though these texts may be liberally quoted as part of the techniques used), nor even on reverence for the historical Buddha (though this is prevalent), it has sometimes been considered distinct from Buddhism itself, as different as, say, Judaism is from Christianity, and Christianity from Islam, though obviously related.
Which ever way you categorize the major groups of Buddhism, it should be further noted that each major vehicle is subdivided into sects and schools reminiscent of the diversity among Christians. The differences are so great that there may be no general statement you can make about Buddhism that would apply to every group which would call itself Buddhist.
—Lee Dittmann, store owner
Information on Maps of Buddhism
|
||||||||||||||||