Killing the Buddha! (Buddhism, beliefs, church, prophet, experience)

[Sunstone]

"If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him!" -- Zen Buddhist Proverb.

At least one common way of interpreting that proverb is to assert it means the serious student of Buddhism must not blindly follow authority, but instead test each principle against his own reason, knowledge, and experience to prove to himself whether it is true or not. Only if he finds it proves true should he follow it.

Is this a generally good and sound approach to religious authority?

Should this approach be adopted by other religions?

Is there any weakness to this notion that we should test against our own experience and reason the teachings of others, no matter how authoritative they are?

[Bishka]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

"If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him!" -- Zen Buddhist Proverb.

I just read that today and when I read it I nearly shouted with joy.

Originally Posted by Sunstone

Is this a generally good and sound approach to religious authority?

Absoltuley. In the LDS Church, though it is obviously not practiced by all, our prophets and our leaders(most of them should say this) that we should find out for ourselves. I tend to question everything, and then usually end up accepting most of it.

Originally Posted by Sunstone

Should this approach be adopted by other religions?

Yes, oh my, yes!

Originally Posted by Sunstone

Is there any weakness to this notion that we should test against our own experience and reason the teachings of others, no matter how authoritative they are?

No,I think we should question all our experiences, dig deeper, find out what they really are and what they really mean.

[Comet]

[quote=Sunstone]"

If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him!" -- Zen Buddhist Proverb.

At least one common way of interpreting that proverb is to assert it means the serious student of Buddhism must not blindly follow authority, but instead test each principle against his own reason, knowledge, and experience to prove to himself whether it is true or not. Only if he finds it proves true should he follow it.

OR it could mean only you have the way to your own path to enlightenment...... Besides, the Buddha never claimed to be "God". One who speaks in haste to conform others has no place to thyself.

Is this a generally good and sound approach to religious authority?

Sounds a little too "religious" to me in some aspects. Besides, most Buddhists are pacifists and would not kill at all.

Should this approach be adopted by other religions?

Perhaps it already has been........

Is there any weakness to this notion that we should test against our own experience and reason the teachings of others, no matter how authoritative they are?

If you understand the true teachings this would be an irrelavent question.

Sorry, I should let a Buddhist answer more so than I on this matter..... just had a great need to reply on this.

[evearael]

Originally Posted by Sunstone

...must not blindly follow authority, but instead test each principle against his own reason, knowledge, and experience to prove to himself whether it is true or not. Only if he finds it proves true should he follow it.

That's what I tend to do with my own beliefs... which is why they are a strange mix of extremely Reform and Orthodox ideas and interpretations. I refuse to accept anything, regardless of the source, without lengthy meditation and study. (This does not mean that one should go out into the world and recklessly harm others to see if it is wrong. It means one should cultivate empathy for others to understand why it is wrong to rape and murder, for example.) The only weakness is that what the individual chooses to study and test are going to reflect their internal biases... and if the individual fails to recognize, or chooses to ignore their biases, they can end up studying only what reflects positively on what they already hold true, which in some cases is truly warped.

[Bishka]

Originally Posted by Comet

Sounds a little too "religious" to me in some aspects. Besides, most Buddhists are pacifists and would not kill at all.

That's not what it is supposed to mean.

Take this for instance:

"This may sound like blasphemous statements, but they are inteded to put the true role of the Buddha's teaching and of Zen practice into persepective. The Buddha is not to be seen as outside of oneself. If you see him as another being, that is not the real Buddha at all and you must kill him.

There is not killing of anyone of course; it is jus the language of Zen which likes to shock and be blunt so as to leave not room for misinterpretation. What one is to kill is the ignorance of one's own mind; that is always the motiveation of genuine Zen practice."

[Comet]

Perhaps you see the point I was trying to make then

Don't take me out of context so quickly.... many are quick to judge (perhaps I was as well). I was trying to make a point in regards to the questions of the OP.

Should this approach be adopted by other religions?

Yes, oh my, yes!

OR it could mean only you have the way to your own path to enlightenment...... Besides, the Buddha never claimed to be "God". One who speaks in haste to conform others has no place to thyself.

[Bishka]

Originally Posted by Comet

Perhaps you see the point I was trying to make then

Don't take me out of context so quickly.... many are quick to judge (perhaps I was as well). I was trying to make a point in regards to the questions of the OP.

I wasn't forcing it on them, in no way would I do that. I was not hastly speaking either. I would think that if all the world religions just tried it, it might do them benefit, but whatever brings them closer to their self-fufillment.

[Comet]

Originally Posted by beckysoup61

I wasn't forcing it on them, in no way would I do that. I was not hastly speaking either. I would think that if all the world religions just tried it, it might do them benefit, but whatever brings them closer to their self-fufillment.

I know. We see view things very similarly, but at a very different angle as well