Intro and Dharma/Dogma questions

[winky10]

Good morning and thank you for your interest in our spiritual development. I have some pretty hefty (at least for me) questions regarding dogma and its role in my life, both past and future. I was born and raised in the US Midwest, and like many others, was forced (for lack of a better word) into Roman Catholicism without regard to my individual beliefs, which to say the least, were quite different. To compound that, I was also expected by my very devout grandparents to take part in Catholicism's rituals. This meant that this participation had quickly become rote and empty. Actions to be carried out regardless of personal belief. Questioning the various dogmatic approaches to salvation was not really entertained. Thus began my long distrust of religion. Agnosticism became my religion. Simply put, I have had a distrust of anything supernatural or metaphysical. While I have a difficult time putting it into words, I think this is not the same as being without beliefs. I have believed, and still do, that much of dogma was incorporated in order to provide a framework of understanding for practitioners. Consider how limited was the collective SCIENTIFIC knowledge at any given time in history, and I think it is easy to see how answers incorporating the metaphysical were formed and even necessary, at least at that time. So doesn't our improved understanding of our physical world require us to reevaluate those dogmatic principles? If not, is it not easy to find conflict between science and Buddhism?

I am new to the study of Buddhism and seem to be stuck. I have attended both a Zen Temple, and a Tibetan Learning Center. In each, emphasis is place on different aspects of each religion. These present as monumental obstacles to my mind. For example, Vajrayana and chakras, White Tara, etc. There are perhaps many more of which I am unaware. These seem to be inescapable dogmatic approaches in Tibetan Buddhism, but is so entirely foreign to me and is something that, at this time, I don't ever expect myself to fully embrace. And if you do not embrace it fully, what is the point?

I guess I am wondering a few things:
Is agnostic Buddhism possible?
If yes, what does that say about the tradition of Buddhist dogma?

I have much, much more to learn and look forward to your input.

[Fortyeightvows]

Maybe I can suggest something?
If you haven't already, learn as much as you can about the four noble truths, which includes the eightfold path, the five aggregates and the twelve links. These are the foundation of all buddhist traditions and by examining we can see how our own experience is well explained by these. The teachings on living ethically and on karma go hand in hand and karma can be presented in a very reasonable way:
good actions bring good results and bad actions bring bad results
one will not get a good result from a bad action, nor the opposite. You'll never get apples if you plant oranges.
one will not have a result that one has not created the cause for

But anyways just try and get the basic teachings first. Maybe try to understand the five aggregates and their relationship as it occurs in daily life first.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Good morning and thank you for your interest in our spiritual development. I have some pretty hefty (at least for me) questions regarding dogma and its role in my life, both past and future. I was born and raised in the US Midwest, and like many others, was forced (for lack of a better word) into Roman Catholicism without regard to my individual beliefs, which to say the least, were quite different. To compound that, I was also expected by my very devout grandparents to take part in Catholicism's rituals. This meant that this participation had quickly become rote and empty. Actions to be carried out regardless of personal belief. Questioning the various dogmatic approaches to salvation was not really entertained. Thus began my long distrust of religion. Agnosticism became my religion. Simply put, I have had a distrust of anything supernatural or metaphysical. While I have a difficult time putting it into words, I think this is not the same as being without beliefs. I have believed, and still do, that much of dogma was incorporated in order to provide a framework of understanding for practitioners. Consider how limited was the collective SCIENTIFIC knowledge at any given time in history, and I think it is easy to see how answers incorporating the metaphysical were formed and even necessary, at least at that time. So doesn't our improved understanding of our physical world require us to reevaluate those dogmatic principles? If not, is it not easy to find conflict between science and Buddhism?

I am new to the study of Buddhism and seem to be stuck. I have attended both a Zen Temple, and a Tibetan Learning Center. In each, emphasis is place on different aspects of each religion. These present as monumental obstacles to my mind. For example, Vajrayana and chakras, White Tara, etc. There are perhaps many more of which I am unaware. These seem to be inescapable dogmatic approaches in Tibetan Buddhism, but is so entirely foreign to me and is something that, at this time, I don't ever expect myself to fully embrace. And if you do not embrace it fully, what is the point?

I guess I am wondering a few things:
Is agnostic Buddhism possible?
If yes, what does that say about the tradition of Buddhist dogma?

I have much, much more to learn and look forward to your input.

Welcome to DW! I used to feel just like you years ago when first started reading Buddhist texts and such, over the years i've softened a lot, I still have a certain degree of skepticism..but among other things, I realize a large part of this skepticism is cultural.
honestly, I think you should examine your own biases as to what seems "foreign" to you, and not necessarily reject it based on that. It is not a healthy thing on the Mahayana path to run away from something because it seems foreign to you...you should actually be doing the opposite, whether you end up practicing a given tradition or not, you should try to approach it with an open heart, and get what you can from it, rather than simply saying you don't think it's for you because some aspect seems foreign - this is not a good way to approach any teaching. With this approach you will end up with a Buddhism that only caters to your own biases, never challenges you, and allows you to simply miss out on some of the most profound teachings you can get simply due to the fact that some aspect of what a person or traditions says didn't agree with you.

I don't mean to be overly critical, but I have seen many people try to practice "agnostic Buddhism", and what it usually amounts to is westerners trying to make the most comfortable, easy, non-offensive version of Buddhism possible. This might be helpful as a sort of therapy-based approach, but if you are interested in Dharma in a more holistic sense, I would adjust your expectations and try to approach different traditions without dwelling on your own preferences so much, and at least accepting the possibility that exploration of the Dharma is more important than creating something you are comfortable with.

Agnosticism became my religion. Simply put, I have had a distrust of anything supernatural or metaphysical.

So you want a path that just confirms your distrust? Why do you need a path at all for that? There is a spectrum of interpretation in what you are calling "mysticism" within Buddhism. Some of it simply wouldn't fit your current worldview (which as I said, shouldn't disqualify you from exploring it if you're interested in really learning anyway, rather than bias confrimation) , but some might surprise you in how well it is explained if you were to ask. Buddhism often does a good job of explaining itself.

It might be worth starting with philosophy rather than practice as well..if the "mysticism" is what's throwing you for a loop. A good book to check out is A Profound Mind by HH The Dalai Lama.

[Seishin]

This article sums up my feelings on the subject quite well http://www.tricycle.com/blog/against-co ... e-buddhism

[Punya]

If you haven't already, learn as much as you can about the four noble truths, which includes the eightfold path, the five aggregates and the twelve links. 

I agree. In the beginning it's good to ignore the wrapping of different cultures and get to the core teachings. Maybe try to find a program at a local centre or an online program that does just that.

I originally approached buddhism in a very logical, rational way and studied the basic Mayahana teachings. Over time I found I had the capacity to get past the rational. This happened very slowly. I can see that you're wary because of your previous experiences but I'd say just take your time, explore with an open mind and don't expect everything to fit into your current paradigm.

And, BTW, welcome to Dharmawheel.

[Kim O'Hara]

...
Is agnostic Buddhism possible?
If yes, what does that say about the tradition of Buddhist dogma?

There is quite a strong movement called "secular Buddhism" which is motivated by the wish to strip away "cultural" and "religious" aspects of Buddhism, partly with the aim of making it more acceptable to a modern western society.
This long review http://www.tricycle.com/reviews/secular-buddhism of a book by one of its founders gives a pretty good overview of its history and some of its positives and negatives. If you want something less formal, just google "secular Buddhism" and see what comes up.
It is fair to say that a lot of us think secular Buddhism goes too far, throwing out stuff which is actually essential, but you can make up your own mind.


Kim

[DNS]

Welcome to Dharma Wheel!

Is agnostic Buddhism possible?
If yes, what does that say about the tradition of Buddhist dogma?

That Buddhism is flexible. Buddhism has always adapted to the cultures it has come into contact. Personally I don't see anything wrong with agnostic style Buddhism, up to a point, as long as the basics, 4 noble truths, 8 fold path are there.

[winky10]

Many thanks to all who have answered.

Maybe I can suggest something?
If you haven't already, learn as much as you can about the four noble truths, which includes the eightfold path, the five aggregates and the twelve links. These are the foundation of all buddhist traditions and by examining we can see how our own experience is well explained by these. The teachings on living ethically and on karma go hand in hand and karma can be presented in a very reasonable way:
good actions bring good results and bad actions bring bad results
one will not get a good result from a bad action, nor the opposite. You'll never get apples if you plant oranges.
one will not have a result that one has not created the cause for

But anyways just try and get the basic teachings first. Maybe try to understand the five aggregates and their relationship as it occurs in daily life first.

I will keep this in mind as I continue. I do know that I can get ahead of myself if I allow it. Thank you

To Johnny Dangerous, your critical thinking and answers provide many things for me to think about. Thank you. I feel as though I should clarify, I am not looking for a path that confirms my distrust. I am looking for a path that dissolves it. I stated that I have had a distrust of the metaphysical, and perhaps "skepticism" would have been more accurate. But in any case, I am not sure that is synonymous with an unwillingness to accept it. It merely means it requires more investigation (for me).

This does not mean that I have a desire to see Buddhism stripped of all of its original qualities in order to fit into western culture. But it would seem one must admit that there are indeed aspects derived solely from cultural...necessity. Does it not stand to reason that since those cultural necessities do not exist in the west, that those aspects and their relevancy should be questioned (if only at an individual level) ? If Buddhism and Dharma are experiential, isn't it required?

Oops, I am probably getting ahead of myself again, but one of the aspects of Buddhism I do like is the ability to discuss these things without being told, "Simply accept it. It is true. You are not advanced enough to see it". Perhaps that is the part I distrust?

All that notwithstanding, I do realize that my happiness requires a complete paradigm shift. As I ask these questions, read, learn, and meditate, I realize that I am the architect for the framework of my happiness. I simply want to build a foundation free of doubt and distrust. At this point, just starting out, it feels as though it happens slowly as each piece of wisdom is picked up, investigated and either accepted or not. Remembering that to not be accepted does not mean to never be accepted.

It is with this spirit I ask these questions. Not to create doubt, but clarity.

[muni]

Winky10,

I am not looking for a path that confirms my distrust. I am looking for a path that dissolves it.
You are not advanced enough to see it". Perhaps that is the part I distrust?

This you are not advanced and he / she is advanced practitioner and so gives the intention that something great and new must be reached by a one. And this can start to look a desperate thing to do, since this dissolving of distrust can only when the mistaken “me" dissolves in what we call Buddha Nature. Only then distrust has no any ground of existence anymore.

Noble Truths yes, good advice for all of us.

Simply accept it. It is true

That is not what I heard we should do. We should examine, contemplate, try it out/practice . If it cannot help, it doesn't help to hold on it neither. Our intention is what is important. When we really want to get rid of our mistaken self-ego since clinging to it is the source of our suffering, then we need the "medicine" which is appropiate for us. This can be completely different for another. Therefore there is the symbolic number of 84000 medicines for 84000 problems.

[Seishin]

The Buddha encouraged us to "dhamma-vicaya” or “dhamma inquiry". This isn't a questioning (doubting) of the teachings, it is a call to practice and investigate.

In gassho,
Seishin