In our last blogpost, we talked about Hinduism, but today we go on to consider the Hindu founder of–what he called the “middle way” between various forms of Hinduism–Siddhartha Gautama , “the Buddha” (6th century BC). The stated purpose of Hinduism had been “to achieve Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha.”
dharma = "(in Indian religion) the eternal and inherent nature of reality, regarded in Hinduism as a cosmic law underlying right behavior and social order." (Bing)
artha = "the pursuit of wealth or material advantage" (Britannica.com)
kama = "obtaining enjoyment from life"
moksha = "enlightenment"
But the Buddha renounced artha and kama. He focused on dharma and a revolutionary doctrine called nirvana (“quenching” or “blowing out”) . Hinduism had taught that the soul is eternal, and that by passing through multiple lives, and reincarnations, and by way of karma can eventually achieve moksha.
karma = "(in Hinduism and Buddhism) the sum of a person's actions in this and previous states of existence, viewed as deciding their fate in future existences."
But Gautama (Buddha) taught that many cycles of these multiple births and rebirths can be skipped by following the noble eight-fold path.
THE NOBLE EIGHTFOLD PATH:
- Right understanding
- Right thought
- Right speech
- Right action
- Right livelihood (no trading in animals for slaughter, dealing in weapons, dealing in slaves, dealing in poison or dealing in intoxicants.)
- Right effort
- Right mindfulness (putting aside greed and all distress )
- Right concentration (pleasant abiding)
A good way of understanding the difference between Hinduism and Buddhism is by thinking of the Protestant Reformation in 16th century Europe. One source says:
“Gautama did for India what Luther and the Reformers did for Christendom.”
The Journal of Sacred Literature
Buddha’s teachings (contained in the buddhavacana) seem, though, more similar to a self-help program, kind of like Tony Robbins’ 5 Steps to Take Control of Your Life Now.
But, from just a strictly epistemological point-of-view, the question is, Are the buddhavacana‘s propositions true?
> The universality of suffering lies at the core of Buddhist teaching. The nature of suffering, its cause, and the noble eightfold path toward its elimination constitutes the main focus of Buddhist search for enlightenment.
That sounds reasonable (and even admirable).
>Buddhists don’t acknowledge a supreme god or deity.
But that implies no after-life, doesn’t it?
One site answers that this way: Nirvana is about “getting off the Ferris wheel of reincarnation…“ But what happens then?
The site goes on to say: “Where Buddha departed most radically from Hinduism was in his doctrine of anatta, the notion that individuals do not possess eternal souls. Instead of eternal souls, individuals consist of a bundle of habits, memories, sensations, desires, and so forth, which together delude one into thinking that he or she consists of a stable, lasting self.”
So let’s sum up.
Buddhist teaching is about escaping suffering in this life. It is not concerned with the next. So that’s its ontology. And its cosmology? We are told about the Thirty One Planes of Existence through which beings are born and reborn. And we are told that:
Rev. Tri Ratna Priya Karuna
But what about a first cause?
After a fair amount of research, I found this: “One of the basic tenets of Buddhism is the concept of interdependence which says that all things exist only in relationship to others, and that nothing can have an independent and autonomous existence. The world is a vast flow of events that are linked together and participate in one another. Thus there can be no First Cause, and no creation ex nihilo of the universe, as in the Big Bang theory.”
Hmmm…
Even though so many famous people (such as Angelina Jolie, Orlando Bloom, Keanu Reeves, Leonard Cohen, Tina Turner, Steve Jobs, and Tiger Woods) are okay with that, I’m not sure that I am.
I checked the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and found something called The Cosmological Argument which says:
“…Philosophers infer deductively, inductively, or abductively by inference to the best explanation that a first or sustaining cause, a necessary being, an unmoved mover, or a personal being (God) exists that caused and/or sustains the universe. “
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
So, despite its popularity among Hollywood celebrities, singers and song-writers, entrepreneurs, and golfers, and even considering Gautama’s laudible, well-intentioned sincerity, it seems that we have to look further than the buddhavacana to find the source of ultimate truth.
