Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Hey
What is the general feeling in Buddhist circles concerning strictness of ceremony etc.
What is the general feeling in Buddhist circles concerning strictness of ceremony etc.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
'Strict' Buddhism or liberal Buddhism
- Thread starter Desert Snake
- Start date
Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
How long is a piece of string?
In Zen, ceremony is "strict."
In Zen, ceremony is "strict."
Please be a little more specific. What do you have in mind by the word "ceremony"? And for that matter, how do you define strict?
Also, please remember that Buddhism encompasses a number of traditions which may or may not have different understandings of any particular ceremony you have in mind.
To take up one example, it is common in Burma for all Buddhist males to ordain for a temporary amount of time as young boys, almost as a coming of age ritual. Some of these boys will remain monks for the rest of their lives while others will plan to disrobe after a week or few months. This voluntary disrobing and return to lay-life is not frowned upon. In Sri Lanka on the other hand, if you take the vows to become a monk you are expected to keep them for life. Now, you can voluntarily disrobe in Sri Lanka without ostracism, that isn't the issue. The issue is taking the ordination vow knowing you will not keep it for the rest of your lifetime. In Burma, it's no problem if you take the ordination without the intent for a lifelong commitment. This may be one example of a difference in "strictness", and this is between two traditions that are both Theravadin.
Also, please remember that Buddhism encompasses a number of traditions which may or may not have different understandings of any particular ceremony you have in mind.
To take up one example, it is common in Burma for all Buddhist males to ordain for a temporary amount of time as young boys, almost as a coming of age ritual. Some of these boys will remain monks for the rest of their lives while others will plan to disrobe after a week or few months. This voluntary disrobing and return to lay-life is not frowned upon. In Sri Lanka on the other hand, if you take the vows to become a monk you are expected to keep them for life. Now, you can voluntarily disrobe in Sri Lanka without ostracism, that isn't the issue. The issue is taking the ordination vow knowing you will not keep it for the rest of your lifetime. In Burma, it's no problem if you take the ordination without the intent for a lifelong commitment. This may be one example of a difference in "strictness", and this is between two traditions that are both Theravadin.
Buddhism doesn't really divide in liberal and strict varieties quite as Christianity or perhaps Judaism do.
Perhaps you could give us some more specific questions?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Right, I need to read up on ceremonies and traditions before having any specific questions.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
More related to practice. I know there are Buddhist 'ceremonies' but I'm not familiar with them.
Let me try to give some data points.
One of the basic practices in at least three different schools (or even vehicles) is named Vipassana, Zazen or Shamata (there are some differences, but they are IMO minor and the purpose is much the same far as I can tell).
There is no particular taboo I am aware of against switching among the three if one has the opportunity - although, to be fair, most temples and practice groups will simply adopt the one that is traditional to them (Vipassana for Theravada, Zazen for Soto Zen, Shamata for Tibetan Vajrayana). For that matter, it is not all that unusual (at least here in Brazil) for Dharma students and even instructors to take refuge in two or more schools without necessarily letting go of the previous ones. Being part of a transmission lineage is a serious commitment, but not necessarily at odds with being part of other lineages.
The practice itself is somewhat rigid, but then it can hardly work any other way. It involves a certain sitting stance, attention to breathing or to a fixed point, slow walking around the room - all in order to reach and train certain mental states. But there is no particular belief matter involved. During the practice proper there is not even speech.
On the other hand, there are recurrent troubles with people going too far into attempting to appease other religions or even cultural diferences. There are those who want to mix-and-match Buddhism with hemp use, Christianity, Hinduism, even Spiritism.
One of the basic practices in at least three different schools (or even vehicles) is named Vipassana, Zazen or Shamata (there are some differences, but they are IMO minor and the purpose is much the same far as I can tell).
There is no particular taboo I am aware of against switching among the three if one has the opportunity - although, to be fair, most temples and practice groups will simply adopt the one that is traditional to them (Vipassana for Theravada, Zazen for Soto Zen, Shamata for Tibetan Vajrayana). For that matter, it is not all that unusual (at least here in Brazil) for Dharma students and even instructors to take refuge in two or more schools without necessarily letting go of the previous ones. Being part of a transmission lineage is a serious commitment, but not necessarily at odds with being part of other lineages.
The practice itself is somewhat rigid, but then it can hardly work any other way. It involves a certain sitting stance, attention to breathing or to a fixed point, slow walking around the room - all in order to reach and train certain mental states. But there is no particular belief matter involved. During the practice proper there is not even speech.
On the other hand, there are recurrent troubles with people going too far into attempting to appease other religions or even cultural diferences. There are those who want to mix-and-match Buddhism with hemp use, Christianity, Hinduism, even Spiritism.
Last edited:
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Ok stuff I have to research, thanks.
Last edited:
In the Burmese Theravada tradition I practice in, vipassana is definitely the most emphasized form of meditation. We are taught that only vipassana can lead to nibbana. We also practice samatha meditation as well. Typically though, we practice samatha for the purpose of focusing our mind so it can engage in vipassana more deeply. We are taught that samatha alone, when mastered, leads to rebirth in the higher realms of the Fine-Material Sphere and the Formless Sphere. These rebirths are lofty and sublime experiences; but, they too are impermanent and are no release from samsara.
Other traditions may have a different take on what I just said.
I am also aware of some Theravada teachers who strongly recommend mastering samatha meditation to the point where you can enter any of the jhana states at will, BEFORE you even attempt vipassana. My teachers disagree with that sentiment. When you consult the suttas, I think the Buddha's position is clear that vipassana can be undertaken before mastery of the jhana states of consciousness. My main textual evidence for my position comes from the Satipatthana Sutta, which is the ultimate guidebook on vipassana. The Buddha makes it clear that mastering the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is sufficient to bring one out of samsara and into nibbana.
I bring this up not as a digression but as an illustration of differences that are present within Theravada. And I haven't even begun to talk about differences between Theravada and Mahayana...
I bring this up not as a digression but as an illustration of differences that are present within Theravada. And I haven't even begun to talk about differences between Theravada and Mahayana...
Yet which are more liberal and which are more traditional among the schools?
I truly don't know.
I truly don't know.
Here is a "ceremony" that can promote the heart opening to compassion
Generating the Mind for Enlightenment | The Office of His Holiness The Dalai Lama
Ceremonies are symbols of inner transformation. If they free you, they are liberators, if they enslave you they are a tyrant to you.
Personal inclination may be a greater determinant of how much one can benefit from ceremonies.
Here is a practice of Zen with few ceremonies, just sitting.
http://www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/zenmind.pdf
Generating the Mind for Enlightenment | The Office of His Holiness The Dalai Lama
Ceremonies are symbols of inner transformation. If they free you, they are liberators, if they enslave you they are a tyrant to you.
Personal inclination may be a greater determinant of how much one can benefit from ceremonies.
Here is a practice of Zen with few ceremonies, just sitting.
http://www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/zenmind.pdf
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Ablaze
Buddham Saranam Gacchami
It can be exceedingly difficult to generalize about Buddhists when it comes to something as diverse as ceremonial practices. However, if it must be done, it would be fair to say that traditional Buddhism is quite serious about its rituals. The exact nature of the ceremony (complexity, procedural details, duration) and its perceived significance depend largely on the particular Buddhist school in question.
Although the details vary by tradition, all forms of Buddhism as it has been practiced historically (prior to its introduction to the West where it has been, in some cases, considerably secularized) have incorporated ceremonies and (in more cases than not) tend to practice them quite strictly as a means of demonstrating devotion and respect to the lineage. Not only that, but the strictness of ceremonial practice also tends to correlate positively with the degree of concentration and mindfulness promoted by those practicing, since memorizing and executing proper form during ceremonies typically demands a considerable investment of cognitive resources and, if practiced wholeheartedly, overrides the tendency to unconsciously assimilate information and operate on auto-pilot.
A brief example derived from first-hand experience: Contrary to popular belief, the traditions in which my practice is rooted (Zen/Chan/Seon - the East Asian meditation schools) place an enormous amount of emphasis upon ceremony. For instance, proper bowing etiquette and strict ritual practice is an absolute must. While it may sound on the verge of obsessive-compulsive, during ceremonies, the officiant bows once at the left of the altar, sidesteps to the right, makes an incense offering by running one's fingers over a lit stick of incense, touches the incense to the forehead with the right hand while keeping the left in gassho/prayer, sidesteps to the right, makes a 180 degree turn to the left to avoid turning one's back directly to the Buddha, and completes three full prostrations about a meter back from the front of the altar. Not outrageously elaborate, but quite specific and arguably strict nonetheless.
This degree of specificity and strictness requires practitioners to exercise a great deal of attention to detail, thus concentration and mindfulness, so as to avoid falling back into the default mode of automaticity, indulging unknowingly in unconscious habits, or practicing mindless activity. More experienced practitioners will not shy away from correcting improper or sloppy form.
With that said, it is critical not to conflate strictness with ruthlessness. Simply because a ceremony is practice strictly does not mean the practitioners involved ruthlessly evaluate those who may not adhere perfectly to every subtle and nuanced maneuver. The purpose of the strictness of ceremony is not to take pride in doing it the right way, or put others down for doing it the wrong way, but to cultivate one's mind by means of the body - mental cultivation through physical action.
Although the details vary by tradition, all forms of Buddhism as it has been practiced historically (prior to its introduction to the West where it has been, in some cases, considerably secularized) have incorporated ceremonies and (in more cases than not) tend to practice them quite strictly as a means of demonstrating devotion and respect to the lineage. Not only that, but the strictness of ceremonial practice also tends to correlate positively with the degree of concentration and mindfulness promoted by those practicing, since memorizing and executing proper form during ceremonies typically demands a considerable investment of cognitive resources and, if practiced wholeheartedly, overrides the tendency to unconsciously assimilate information and operate on auto-pilot.
A brief example derived from first-hand experience: Contrary to popular belief, the traditions in which my practice is rooted (Zen/Chan/Seon - the East Asian meditation schools) place an enormous amount of emphasis upon ceremony. For instance, proper bowing etiquette and strict ritual practice is an absolute must. While it may sound on the verge of obsessive-compulsive, during ceremonies, the officiant bows once at the left of the altar, sidesteps to the right, makes an incense offering by running one's fingers over a lit stick of incense, touches the incense to the forehead with the right hand while keeping the left in gassho/prayer, sidesteps to the right, makes a 180 degree turn to the left to avoid turning one's back directly to the Buddha, and completes three full prostrations about a meter back from the front of the altar. Not outrageously elaborate, but quite specific and arguably strict nonetheless.
This degree of specificity and strictness requires practitioners to exercise a great deal of attention to detail, thus concentration and mindfulness, so as to avoid falling back into the default mode of automaticity, indulging unknowingly in unconscious habits, or practicing mindless activity. More experienced practitioners will not shy away from correcting improper or sloppy form.
With that said, it is critical not to conflate strictness with ruthlessness. Simply because a ceremony is practice strictly does not mean the practitioners involved ruthlessly evaluate those who may not adhere perfectly to every subtle and nuanced maneuver. The purpose of the strictness of ceremony is not to take pride in doing it the right way, or put others down for doing it the wrong way, but to cultivate one's mind by means of the body - mental cultivation through physical action.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Thanks, that was the sort of thing I was referring to..
Ablaze
Buddham Saranam Gacchami
Yeshe Dondrub
Kagyupa OBT-Thubetan
Some already covered it. Recapping so some understand different approaches.
Many Buddhist regions have cultural influence as well, it is important to be able to spate culture from Dharma.
There are different approaches to tricking ego to let go.
There are practices (not ritual) that are aimed at different lifestyles. Example would be Mandala practices, which are effective for monastic monks who do not experience what others may outside those confines. In the west we have built many mind mandala's, and can work on those experiences to let go of attachment while doing smaller versions.
Example is Tibetan Buddhism, which has some very flavorful ceremonies in some of the schools, while others focus more on hard core teachings and practice. However when these Rinpoche's, and even the 16th Karmapa looked at the west, they were clear that the Tibetan ceremonies have no purpose in teaching dharma to the west, and many were stripped out and changed based on how westerners gain experience.
Practice and ceremony will not make you enlightened. Perception, mind, true consciousness, being able to see mind, let go of grasping and other points will guide you there, you already have it, just can't see it. Some of us prostrate each morning, do deep meditation on a structured system. Doesn't mean they have to be completed for it to occur.
Approaches have to change with various groups of people. Westerners have an advantage in some ways, they have more experience to pull from. To deal with. To let go of grasping with, and learning to deal with more intense situations. Monastic practices can help with that, and the tradition, however may need to be approached in a different manner, and the cultural aspects will have little benefit, when core teachings are far more important.
Many Buddhist regions have cultural influence as well, it is important to be able to spate culture from Dharma.
There are different approaches to tricking ego to let go.
There are practices (not ritual) that are aimed at different lifestyles. Example would be Mandala practices, which are effective for monastic monks who do not experience what others may outside those confines. In the west we have built many mind mandala's, and can work on those experiences to let go of attachment while doing smaller versions.
Example is Tibetan Buddhism, which has some very flavorful ceremonies in some of the schools, while others focus more on hard core teachings and practice. However when these Rinpoche's, and even the 16th Karmapa looked at the west, they were clear that the Tibetan ceremonies have no purpose in teaching dharma to the west, and many were stripped out and changed based on how westerners gain experience.
Practice and ceremony will not make you enlightened. Perception, mind, true consciousness, being able to see mind, let go of grasping and other points will guide you there, you already have it, just can't see it. Some of us prostrate each morning, do deep meditation on a structured system. Doesn't mean they have to be completed for it to occur.
Approaches have to change with various groups of people. Westerners have an advantage in some ways, they have more experience to pull from. To deal with. To let go of grasping with, and learning to deal with more intense situations. Monastic practices can help with that, and the tradition, however may need to be approached in a different manner, and the cultural aspects will have little benefit, when core teachings are far more important.