What is religion

At my grandfather's funeral, I received an explanation of several layers of diagrams saying “the world after death is like this.”

Not limited to Buddhism, the world after death, it often starts with “you know there is, right?” including heaven and hell, and I don't understand “why is it supposed to exist even though no one has ever seen it?”

Furthermore, in my perception, Buddhism, for example, is an image of Gudha Sittaruda writing a novel under the pseudonym of Buddha, and the founders of each denomination read it to spread their reading impressions. If you don't think so, you won't be able to understand that there will be differences in the scriptures and differences in festivals between denominations.

If religion is absolute and unwavering, there is no change in interpretation or division of sects. I think the fact that groups break up and interpretations change is proof that it is an imperfect creation. There is a possibility that it will be linked to indigenous beliefs in order to spread it.

It's a pretty biased opinion, but I'd like you to tell me if there is anything that simply explains “why it's like this” or “has it been verified that there is no doubt about it.”

Speaking of chemical experiments, it means “reproducibility,” and this is what happens if you do this. Without it, “do you believe even though you don't know what will happen?” It's going to become.

Also, I have a personality that cannot be recognized unless there is a firm logical basis, but could you tell me if there is such a thing as “no, religion isn't like that”?

4 Zen Responses

Truths discovered by Buddha and religious needs

I think the truth that Buddha (Buddha) discovered is a universal law.
The Four Worries, Suffering, Impermanence, Selflessness, etc.
These truths are useful teachings for controlling and eliminating worries and suffering.
This can be confirmed by anyone even as times and places change.
On the other hand, as Buddhism spread from India to various parts of Asia, it is probably true that it was fleshed out in response to religious needs.
By the time hundreds of years had passed since the Buddha passed away, many sutras were created.
Well, it's like a physical education class.
Whether you play soccer, basketball, or track and field during class, it all leads to physical training.
Whether you worship Amida Buddha or Jizo, if it leads to good control of worries such as greed, anger, laziness, and pride, you can live in peace.
If you think that the next life will be a pure paradise, and the happy ending of your life has been confirmed, the stress in your life will be reduced quite a bit.
The state of mind when worshiping the Buddha leads to a “comfortable life.”
However, we are worried about pride, and we have worries that we want to think that our denomination is the best, so there are times when it becomes a boring fight.
I think this is contrary to the Buddha's teachings.

appending
For example, various acts are impermanent. Everything is changing moment by moment.
Nevertheless, we are unusually unaware and obsessed with “I don't want you to change,” increasing our worries, suffering, and stress.
If you notice that various actions are impermanent, your obsession will decrease, and your worries and suffering will decrease.
When you worship the Buddha, for example, the anguish of anger subsides. Anger is a source of stress, so the more time you have to be quiet and not angry, the less stressful your daily life will be.
We can salivate just by imagining lemons or pickled plums.
Depending on your thoughts and images, you may be able to control your emotions and even your body.
If you change the input to the brain, the output will naturally change as well.

If you look up Buddhism scientifically

It looks like the two questions are being asked at the same time, so I'll separate them at my own discretion.

One problem is that even though it started with the same teachings of Shakyamuni, it has become disparate teachings of the founders of each denomination.
The other one is why are you saying the celestial world or reincarnation when no evidence can be given, faith? That's the problem.

My personal opinion on the first one is, then can it all be said that it is an addition to a novel? That's it.
If the theory that came out later is different from the previous theory, either one is wrong (fantasy), or both are wrong. Neither one is correct.
In this case, speaking in order, there is a high possibility that the one that came out later is a mistake, so let's put that on the back burner and check the credibility of what is in front of us first.
The Pali scriptures, which are said to be closest to the exact teachings taught by Shakyamuni, have been translated into Japanese quite a bit. It's just that group, and I want them to see if they're consistent.
In today's Buddhist world, for some reason, they immediately mix things before and after and do research at the same time, and they say, “Since they are different from each other, I don't know which one is true. I'll end the story with “I wonder if a lot has changed.” The context is clear, so I want you to look up only the previous one and see if there are any contradictions in it.
What came out later might be something like adding to a novel. So, can we say that the first one was also decided to be a novel?

So, continuing on to the second question, how can we “recreate” heaven, hell, reincarnation, etc. Can you confirm it?
The Pali Scriptures say, “Once you understand, you will understand. They even say, “You won't understand until you realize it, so don't try to force yourself to believe it.”
If you change the way you look at it, it means “there is no reincarnation. There is no heaven or hell. You can't even decide that until you're aware, right?” That's it.
Therefore, Buddhists feel like Shakyamuni and enlightened people say it (and since it is impossible to say that even the first Pali scripture is a novel), let's believe it.

Since it is written in the sutras, imposing that it is natural to exist is overkill, and denying that it is such nonsense is also overkill.
Then, without mixing, I would like you to leave the stories of each denomination behind, and first check whether there are any contradictions in the Pali Scriptures alone.

I can't say it's fiction or non-fiction

Thank you for your question.

More than 30 years have passed since I was enrolled in the last seat of a monk.
The one in the question as my current state of mind
I agree with the point that “in Buddhism, Gudha Sittaruda wrote a novel under the pseudonym of Buddha, and the founders of each sect read it and spread their reading impressions.”
However, I think there are difficulties with novels that cannot be called 100% fiction and 100% non-fiction.

I think there is a limit to chemical reproducibility.
70% of the human body is water.
Assuming that the remaining 30% becomes bone, are there any chemical experiments that can reproduce the life of water that created 70% of humans?
Even though religion discusses human life and death, I haven't been able to come across any puja, sermons, or demonstration experiments showing where the water that makes up the source of people is born and where it disappears, even if there is so much information.
(I know someone who is doing research on isotopes of water, so I plan to listen to it soon)

Proving the absolute nature of Buddhism is also difficult with “present” human abilities.
Balancing “impermanent conduct” and “absolutely immutable reproducibility”?
I don't think it's possible (with our current concept). (It's not nothing)

I've heard a lot about hell until now, but recently I've been thinking that the question of whether it exists or not is strange.
It makes sense to me if I talk on the premise of “relationships and functions” rather than the presence or absence of “things.”
Just “name” hell because people are afraid of getting hurt, and if you put miso and vegetables instead of people in the boiled water in a pot, it changes to a soup pot that helps people instead of hell.
Hariyama doesn't sting people, and if you make rain protection sheets and tents, it can quickly turn into an evacuation center.
Demons may be appreciated for volunteering for disasters.
(I don't want people to think that inciting fear = religion)

I'm sorry for changing the subject, but...
Buddhism may be fantasy or fiction, but I think it plays a role as a brake to stop the desires of runaway people.

The slander on SNS does not fuel a vicious cycle where people judge people, and “we must not forget the sutras, fugitive, Japanese face love words. We don't use words or justice as weapons. I think it is more persuasive to say “it has been said since 2,500 years ago to use words that are kinder than words to blame.”

Although monks are immature people who cannot become Buddhas, they hope for peace and health amidst contradictions and conflicts.
However, I disagree with defining imposition or assumption as faith.
I hope that faith will grow from a relationship of trust and a sense of security.

Yes, it's all fantasy.

though
Humans believe what they want to believe.
People who are being swayed by COVID-19 misinformation
I can't doubt the hoax.
I want to believe the hoax.

Because there's no evidence that religion is also a hoax
Those who believe will probably be able to believe it.
and
If you rely on it to calm your mind
Wouldn't that be fine?

Of the Nobel Prize winners
Einstein and Yukawa Hideki
I affirm Buddhism.
What is the human attitude of accepting the unknown
I think it's important.

← all dialogues ← previous next →