Amida
Sutra
Part 3 - Buddhism and
G(g)od(s)
The fact that Buddhism is not centered around a Creator
Diety meant that it was highly transportable. It could move
from culture without desrtoying the indigenous G(g)od(s) o
r their places of worship. It also gave the indivudual
believer maximum freedom to explore the divine and his/her
experiences. At the same time atheists and agnostics, as
well as those not particularly religious, had a Way that
led to liberation.
Shakyamuni appeared at a time when the old ways were being
transformed into city cultures with rigid class lines, a
civil service, and formulaic sacrifices. These new rice
kingdoms were centered on the Brahmins, a priestly
aristocracy. One of the criticisms leveled against the new
Buddhist movement was that they did not show respect to the
Brahamins. Many of the early converts to Buddhism were from
the warrior classes. There was growing antagonism between
these two groups as they represented the old, democratic
elder based republics on one hand and the emerging
centralized state based on the cultivation of rice. It is
quite possible, by the way, that Shakyamuni was poisoned to
death when tainted pork was dropped into his begging bowl
by a resentful Brahmin.
Many elements of this conflict still exist in India today.
The Brahmins emphasized that vegetarianism was spiriutally
superior to meat eating. Those who ate meat were seen as
socially and religiously inferior. This created an
indelible line that still runs through Asian society today.
Shakyamuni would eat meat, however, if it had not been
specially prepared for him and if it were placed in his
begging bowl as an offering. This was his way of expressing
solidarity with those being rapidly displaced and relagated
to lower classes. He was also questioning the mere outward
show of religion. Women in vegetarian cultures, for
example, spend hours daily cutting and preparing food.
Western women surely do not want to iimport this feature of
Asian vegetarianism into thier lives. Buddha taught that
the newly created 'lower classes' were actually not lower
at all but they were all Sharers and Hearers, spiritually
equal in every way.
In the emerging centralized states, it became an accepted
'fact' that civilization demanded that everyone act the
same, think the same and worship the same G(g)od(s). The
vision quest was discouraged in these cookie cutter
societies. The priests, furthermore, placed themselves
above the G(g)od(s) because their rituals made it possible
for the G(g)od(s) to act. Reform movements emerged in
reaction to this situation. The Buddha Dharma was one of
these successful of these reforms. Attachment to one single
way to experience the Sacred became a keystone in the
rationale for the centralized, hierarchical state. It was
supported by a parallel deity who was Judge, Prosecurot and
Executioner. In such situations obedience and submission
became the primary experience in both the religious and
social spheres. When these developments are coupled with
race, gender and language, the spiriutal vice is drawn even
tighter. This change in our relationship to the Sacred had
profound consequences for human history.
Believing in an Ultimate Absolute who is the Ultimate
Ego-logical Pwer Centre forced out religoius thinking in
directions from which we have yet to recover. Religion has
been secuced away from authentic experience by confusing
spiritual experience with political, legal, gender and
economic expereinces. Hatred for 'the other' became a
necesary part of religion in order to express undying
loyality with ones faith group. Any wavering was seen as a
threat to civilization. Fanaticism and the desire to
forceably convert others became a fixed feature of many
religious communities. In fact, the more attractive another
religion seemed the more it had to be repressed because its
attractiveness was proof that it was a threat to
civilization and the faith that held it together. A
positive feeling towards another faith was a threat,
evidence that one was falling under its evil spell. It is
widely known that some faiths teach that those who do not
beieve properly are destined for Hell. Still, some go even
futher and teach that the eternal soul comes at the moment
of true belief. Until then one is regarded as merely a
souless animal. Killing such animals could hardly be wrong,
could it? Thus many cultures were exterminated not because
they were insufficient, but just because they were
beautiful in their wisdom. Their very presence posed a
threat on so many levels.
Great Storehouses of ancient wisdom have been lost through
violence against 'the other', or the imperative to convert
this other in to the familiar dominate system. Faith
cleansing ranks along with ethnic cleansing as one of the
great crimes against humanity. We may well weep over the
lost wisdom. The loss of a rich gene pool that comes with
exterminating 'the other' is also a frightening possibiity.
We must be reminded here that we are still discussing only
the four lines of he sutra in question, the lines that
mention the presence of the G(g)od(s) at one of
Shamyamuni's visions. They require even more discussion, so
important are they to the reception of Buddhism in the
West. The Buddha Dharma is the Middle Way between some of
the more negative aspects of monotheism and the total
absence of spirituality.( We can not use the words atheist
and agnostic here because even they are transformed into
paths towards enlightenment by the Buddhas. )
Much more needs to be said on this subject before we can
turn to the vision proper. We will be adding to this
discussion of Buddhims and G(g)od(s) in our next several
installments. Be it said here that the answer, "G(g)od(s)
does not exist." is a bad answer; but the question, "Does
G(g)od(s) exist?" is a bad question.
Blessings be,
Sensei
November 5, 1999
Next: Part 4 -The
Occurrence of G(g)od(s) in Buddhist
Sutras