Buddhist "relics"?

General forum on the teachings of all schools of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism. Topics specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
nichirenista
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by nichirenista »

I had actually thought the opposite. I Thought Buddhism was very rational. Which is why this was upsetting for me. I wasn't seeking for help regarding questions of consciousness. For the umpteenth time, I was asking for confirmation that those are the historical relics of the historical Buddha. Very simple question.

But I think you hit the nail on the head by using the word "subjective." The word I used was "symbolic." In other words, those are the relics of the Buddha -- symbolically, subjectively. Not literally and scientifically.
User avatar
Dan74
Former staff member
Posts: 3403
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:59 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by Dan74 »

Let me quote this post (boldface mine):
Saijun wrote:
Hello,

In terms of archaeology you might be interested to read about the Piprahwa Reilquary, which some believe was one of the eight sites in which the Buddha's ashes were interred. There is a documentary about it that presents a reasonably compelling case for it being true.

With regards to the Maitreya Project's tour, I've been and I have to say that my experience was different from yours; when I walked into the room with the reliquary, the devotion in the room was physically palpable. I personally don't take a position with regard to them either way, but they were inspiring to me and to others--even if they aren't physical relics in the sense that you mean, their power to inspire devotion, I think, makes them worthy of deference.

Personally, I think the most important relics of the Buddha are the Dharma and Sangha, but anything that inspires others to practice cannot be a bad thing.

Hands palm to palm,

Saijun
To me, this is the key.

We might be conflating several issues here. First there is the objectively verifiable truth. "Are these actual relics of Buddha Shakyamuni?" I don't know, probably not.

"Should we then call this out as fraud, same as the Eucharist?" Definitely not. It is a religious ritual, not a scientific claim. Dharma practice is about working with the mind, not with empirical facts of nature. It is far more about our skillful attitude than about verifying claims. An old Zen story comes to mind:
The morning after Philip Kapleau and Professor Phillips arrived at Ryutakuji Monastery they were given a tour of the place by Abbot Soen Nakagawa. Both Americans had been heavily influenced by tales of ancient Chinese masters who'd destroyed sacred texts, and even images of the Buddha, in order to free themselves from attachment to anything. They were thus surprised and disturbed to find themselves being led into a ceremonial hall, where the Roshi invited them to pay respects to a statue of the temple's founder, Hakuin Zenji, by bowing and offering incense.

On seeing Nakagawa bow before the image, Phillips couldn't contain himself, and burst out: "The old Chinese masters burned or spit on Buddha statues! Why do you bow down before them?"

"If you want to spit, you spit," replied the Roshi. "I prefer to bow."
http://viewonbuddhism.org/resources/bud ... ories.html

Of course, many of us find it hard to get past our skepticism, our distaste for rituals, etc. That's OK, there's is plenty in Dharma that can work for you if you are in this camp. You don't have to sign under the whole lot, if you ask me, though others may disagree. Just take up what works for you and don't worry about the rest. Maybe it works for others, just like my father's Christian beliefs had transformed him from an abrasive self-centered atheist into a gentle caring person. So how can one argue that it's all just nonsense? Judge by the fruit, as they say.
User avatar
nichirenista
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by nichirenista »

Thank you. That's all I was looking for. I should clarify that I personally have no problem with rituals. I take part in the ritual at the Nichiren temple. I Simply misunderstood the advertisement for the relics even. Thought I was going to be shown archaeological artifacts of the historical Buddha. Had I known otherwise I would not have attended. I Don't look down on people who find this practice beneficial. I'm just not one of them.
User avatar
nichirenista
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by nichirenista »

I think a big misunderstanding people have had on this thread is as follows: I think people thought I was saying that if the relics aren't historical, archeological artifacts verified by science, then the religious practice behind it isn't valid.

I wasn't saying that at all.

I wasn't passing judgment on the religious aspect.
Jesse
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 6:54 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by Jesse »

nichirenista wrote:I think a big misunderstanding people have had on this thread is as follows: I think people thought I was saying that if the relics aren't historical, archeological artifacts verified by science, then the religious practice behind it isn't valid.

I wasn't saying that at all.

I wasn't passing judgment on the religious aspect.
Who are you kidding?
why on earth does anyone argue whether or not Buddhism is a religion? With a belief system like that, this is clearly a religion.
What I received was great disappoint and a sense that perhaps Buddhism isn't as rational as I'd thought it is, and maybe it's time to look elsewhere
I'd thought Buddhism was above that.
Buddhism has been presented to the west as a rational meditation-based practice that may or may not even be a religion in the traditional sense.
:pig:
Image
Thus shall ye think of all this fleeting world:
A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream;
A flash of lightning in a summer cloud,
A flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream.
User avatar
nichirenista
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by nichirenista »

It's called "form versus content." Or "means to an end." The "content" here is the religious faith and experience. The "end" here is the religious faith and experience. I don't pass judgment on the end/content.

The "form" and the "means" (The belief in the relics) are not my own.

I'm actually a far more complicated and intelligent person than you gave me credit for. I'd appreciate you ceasing with the character assassination.
Jesse
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 6:54 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by Jesse »

How can I 'character assassinate" merely by posting quotes of your own text? Also I don't remember calling you unintelligent. You just say one thing then claim another, say one thing then deny saying it.. either way, whatever I'm done. :alien:
Image
Thus shall ye think of all this fleeting world:
A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream;
A flash of lightning in a summer cloud,
A flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream.
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Science takes the vision of ordinary confused human beings as the benchmark for truth claims. Buddhadharma takes the wisdom vision of awakened beings as the bench mark for truth claims.
If I may I'd like to slightly edit this:

"Science takes the vision of ordinary confused human beings as the benchmark for truth claims." (same as Malcolm's post)

"Buddhadharma takes the wisdom vision of awakened beings as the bench mark for Truth claims." (Truth with a capital "T")
*****
I see the distinction as both subtle and monumental, but it is beyond my current abilities to articulate exactly how that is so.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: AU

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by Wayfarer »

nichirenista wrote: I'm actually a far more complicated and intelligent person than you gave me credit for. I'd appreciate you ceasing with the character assassination.
As Jesse said, all he did was quote back what you had actually entered. I have already said I think you have a right to express your honest doubts and perplexity about such questions, which you have, and it's good that you apparently have come to terms with the issue to some extent. But I don't think that comment you're referring to is close to 'character assassination'. After all, forums are places where ideas are put forward and criticized. That's part of their purpose.

I think you might also reflect on whether your rejection of the tradition of your birth might influence your view of the one you have adopted.

All that said, you're grappling with a big issue, which is one of the consequences of modernity. The world is changing more quickly now than at any time in human history. In the old stone age, it took hundreds of thousands of years to slightly improve flint tools. Now the amount of knowledge in the world is doubling every X months. All kinds of very difficult questions are being thrown up by this state of affairs. So whilst I agree that healthy skepticism and the scientific approach to empirical questions are both generally good things to have, it's also important to keep an open mind.

(Something I learned in Comparative Religion was an intellectual skill called 'bracketing'. This originates from a philosophical method called 'phenomenology'. The Wikipedia entry on it is a fair summary.)
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
User avatar
nichirenista
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by nichirenista »

You (Jesse) have demonstrated that intolerance is found in Buddhism as well. You were attempting character assassination by claiming that I portray myself as a victim (which I don't), by misrepresenting my perspectives, and by minimizing my experiences.

You are one of many people who have done this to me in this thread. It's surreal how I have been attacked in this thread -- by people who claim to be Buddhists, a religion that claims to be compassionate and loving. Oh the irony. The event I attended was called "lovingkindness."

But don't you dare question the basis of that lovingkindness, are you will be subject to "hatefulvilification."

Yes, goodbye. My question was long since answered anyway. Yes, apparently some people believe the relics are literally from the Buddha. And, no, there is no proof that such claims are literally true.

I'm done too.

I hope everyone who attacked me in this thread takes a look at themselves and asks themselves if they really practice the "lovingkindness" they preach. :namaste:
User avatar
nichirenista
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by nichirenista »

I posted above that I have to leave this thread. My question has been answered. And it is by no means deep or complicated or difficult. It is this: " are the relic scientifically verified as authentically from the historical Buddha?" That's not a complicated or difficult or profound question. It is simple. And the answer is no.

With regard to my choice of Buddhism in respect to the religion of my upbringing, one thing I like about Nichiren Buddhism is that it is argumentative. Take a look at the Nichiren folder and you will see a lot of arguments.

At any rate, I have to get out of here now. My questions have been answered and I see no productive reason to stay. Thank you. :namaste:
Wayfarer wrote:
nichirenista wrote: I'm actually a far more complicated and intelligent person than you gave me credit for. I'd appreciate you ceasing with the character assassination.
As Jesse said, all he did was quote back what you had actually entered. I have already said I think you have a right to express your honest doubts and perplexity about such questions, which you have, and it's good that you apparently have come to terms with the issue to some extent. But I don't think that comment you're referring to is close to 'character assassination'. After all, forums are places where ideas are put forward and criticized. That's part of their purpose.

I think you might also reflect on whether your rejection of the tradition of your birth might influence your view of the one you have adopted.

All that said, you're grappling with a big issue, which is one of the consequences of modernity. The world is changing more quickly now than at any time in human history. In the old stone age, it took hundreds of thousands of years to slightly improve flint tools. Now the amount of knowledge in the world is doubling every X months. All kinds of very difficult questions are being thrown up by this state of affairs. So whilst I agree that healthy skepticism and the scientific approach to empirical questions are both generally good things to have, it's also important to keep an open mind.

(Something I learned in Comparative Religion was an intellectual skill called 'bracketing'. This originates from a philosophical method called 'phenomenology'. The Wikipedia entry on it is a fair summary.)
Last edited by nichirenista on Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 1118
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 5:53 am
Location: Texas

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by Mkoll »

nichirenista wrote:You (Jesse) have demonstrated that intolerance is found in Buddhism as well. You were attempting character assassination by claiming that I portray myself as a victim (which I don't), by misrepresenting my perspectives, and by minimizing my experiences.

You are one of many people who have done this to me in this thread. It's surreal how I have been attacked in this thread -- by people who claim to be Buddhists, a religion that claims to be compassionate and loving. Oh the irony. The event I attended was called "lovingkindness."

But don't you dare question the basis of that lovingkindness, are you will be subject to "hatefulvilification."

Yes, goodbye. My question was long since answered anyway. Yes, apparently some people believe the relics are literally from the Buddha. And, no, there is no proof that such claims are literally true.

I'm done too.

I hope everyone who attacked me in this thread takes a look at themselves and asks themselves if they really practice the "lovingkindness" they preach. :namaste:
Sorry your bubble has been burst but expecting people who call themselves Buddhists to automatically be nice is and loving and tolerant is naive. It's not to say there aren't plenty of nice Buddhists because there are, but you'll be disappointed if you expect Buddhists you've never met before to all be this way. It's a religion after all. If your bubble wasn't burst here, it would be burst somewhere else.

I admit I had a similar expectation in the beginning of learning about Buddhism but reality quickly put that view to rest.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
User avatar
nichirenista
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by nichirenista »

You should've seen the dirty look I was given when I decided that I had to leave because I didn't feel comfortable putting the so called relics on my head. Lovingkindness became anger and judgment very quickly. Didn't surprise me. But the attacks I've endured on this thread have surprised me. And so, as I said, I gotta go…. Thanks. :namaste:
User avatar
nichirenista
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 7:24 am

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by nichirenista »

Jesse wrote:
I hope everyone who attacked me in this thread takes a look at themselves and asks themselves if they really practice the "lovingkindness" they preach. :namaste:
Still playing a victim I see. My loving kindness doesn't extend to indulging your persecution fantasies.
I'm an amateur body builder whose been practicing martial arts for 30 years, born to an Italian immigrant but grew up with a Mexican stepfather in a black neighborhood. Trust me. I'm not a victim. And if you were here in front of me now, you'd see, buddy. Keep your insulting psychobabble pop psychology diagnosis to yourself.

I'm receiving private messages about how people on this forum can be intolerant of questioning views, and my question has been answered, and so I'm gone!
Jesse
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 6:54 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by Jesse »

nichirenista wrote:
Jesse wrote:
I hope everyone who attacked me in this thread takes a look at themselves and asks themselves if they really practice the "lovingkindness" they preach. :namaste:
Still playing a victim I see. My loving kindness doesn't extend to indulging your persecution fantasies.
I'm an amateur body builder whose been practicing martial arts for 30 years, born to an Italian immigrant but grew up with a Mexican stepfather in a black neighborhood. Trust me. I'm not a victim. And if you were here in front of me now, you'd see, buddy. Keep your insulting psychobabble pop psychology diagnosis to yourself.

I'm receiving private messages about how people on this forum can be intolerant of questioning views, and my question has been answered, and so I'm gone!
Veiled physical threats are probably against the ToS. I'm starting to think you need actual psychotherapy.
Image
Thus shall ye think of all this fleeting world:
A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream;
A flash of lightning in a summer cloud,
A flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream.
User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: AU

Re: Buddhist "relics"?

Post by Wayfarer »

I am locking this thread due to it have degenerated into name-calling. Might be re-opened later depending on consensus.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
Locked

Return to “Mahāyāna Buddhism”