Is Buddha a made-up story?

Not limited to Buddhism, not limited to monks, I think it's something everyone thinks about at least once when thinking about some kind of religion.

In the first place, Buddhism is a teaching that Buddha, who came to his own senses in India in the past, preached according to that person in order to get rid of the suffering, sorrow, and hesitation of people in various circumstances.
Therefore, the teachings are diverse, and some of them include conflicting things.
Among those teachings, Amitabha Buddha and Yakushi Nyorai also appear.
It is a teaching adapted to the person who was preaching at that time, and that person was saved by teaching things such as Amitabha Buddha.

If you don't ask the Buddha directly, you won't know if Amitabha Buddha etc. are convenient, or if they are a symbol of truth, or if they actually exist, but there is no way to confirm it now.

The only thing that is certain is that I myself was saved by believing in Amitabha Buddha.
It is true that I myself have been saved from the grief of bereavement and the fear of death.
Based on this fact, I don't think it's wrong to say that Amitabha exists.

There is a wide variety of Buddha's teachings, so I hope you believe in the teachings that suit you.

When sutras were introduced to Japan from the continent, they were all brought as sutras preached by the Buddha, so they were all revered as sutras by Japanese Buddhists.
However, in modern times, theories have emerged that there may actually be sutras created hundreds of years after the Buddha passed away, and that there may also be content influenced by other religions.
Japanese sects are taught on the assumption that these sutras are sutras.
Personally, I think it's important whether there is something that resonates with the heart as a story or whether the content leads to Buddhist teachings.
However, if you can prove that it is a sutra created later, no matter how you think about it scientifically, I think it's okay to acknowledge that it is a story rather than a sutra.
There may also be cases where admitting that it is a story is better not to fall into strange fanaticism (reciting sutras will cure illness, etc.).
For example, in “Jataka Monogatari,” which is an episode of Buddha's previous life, there is no way to confirm the truth or falsehood of its content, but it is used as a teaching material for indoctrination activities as a story filled with the essence of Buddhist thought.
Even if it's a story rather than a sutra, it can be said that it's a wonderful story filled with teachings.

The Buddha is there and he saves us (^-^)
I don't know who read what kind of books, but if you say “various Buddhas are fictional beings,” it's not a Buddhist story anymore.

Certainly, there is an idea called the “Mahayana non-Buddhist theory,” where Mahayana Buddhism handed down in Japan is not a Buddhist theory (it is a fake sutra).
However, I don't have a problem with that theory at all.
I just listened to what the Buddha said and believed it as it was.
There is a precious Buddha, and I am very happy to have come across teachings that can lead me to the same state of enlightenment as that Buddha.

It's a fact that it's an invisible entity, so there's no way to prove it.

From here on, it's my personal interpretation.

There is a saying “the three bodies of the Buddha.”
It means there are three bodies.

There are three: hosshin (hosshin), return (hojin), and ojin (ojin).

The corporation is all of that, all of the world. One existence. The phrase “three bodies is one body” indicates that they all exist the same thing. empty.

Retaliation is an invisible presence. An invisible world. There is no body. (Spiritual body? etc.) The other world. Among them, Nyorai attains enlightenment and does not require reincarnation. (Spirit, Shinga, Nyorai, Brahman, etc.)

Response exists just like us. The visible world. A being with a physical body. this world. Among them, Bodhisattvas are beings who have come to save us from another world. (Human, Ego, Bodhisattva, Atman, etc.)

I think people who know probably understood its existence, and the world.
Therefore, they named their existence and personified it.
I think there are a lot of Buddhas now.

Hosshin Buddha (Hosshinbutsu) — the principle of the great universe, the truth, the Buddha personifies the source of light energy that is pervasive throughout the universe, has no shape or shape, and is just there. In Exoteric Buddhism, it is named Birushana Buddha, and in Esoteric Buddhism, it is named Dainichi Nyorai.

Hojinbutsu (Hojinbutsu) — An incarnate Buddha where the wisdom, light, love, and mercy of Doshinbutsu are revealed as kashinbutsu. The Buddha showed the many powers and functions of Doshinbutsu separately. There are many people, such as Amida Nyorai and Yakushi Nyorai.

Ojinbutsu (Ojinbutsu) — An alter ego Buddha who has adapted to save sentient beings, and has incarnated his alter ego as a human in this world. There are Shakyamuni Nyorai, Miroku Bosatsu, etc. It is the alter ego of Hoshin Buddha, where all humans can also become Oshinbutsu if they understand it.

Please bear with me that this is just my personal opinion.
There are various theories.

Finally, read Buddhism, like the handwriting, is the Buddha's teaching, so the most important thing is to put the teachings into practice. Even if you study, it's nothing without practice.

Ryoei Gasho

Amida Nyorai and Yakushi Nyorai are not historical figures. Shaka Nyorai (Shakyamuni) is the only person who appeared in this world to become a Buddha as a human being. However, Amida Nyorai and Yakushi Nyorai are not made-up stories.

Buddhism is a general term for teachings and practices in which humans become Buddha, which have been handed down, developed, and maintained based on the teachings preached by Shakyamuni.

There is not a single “oral written note” of the teachings directly preached by Shakyamuni. After the fall of Shakyamuni, disciples gathered and made a “song” of Shakyamuni's teachings, all memorized them and evangelized them all over the country. After that, hundreds of years passed, and then I left it in “letters.” In that sense, there is no “direct explanation of Shakyamuni.”

What is said to be the earliest form of Shakyamuni's teachings left in writing is the so-called “Agon Sutra.” However, the oldest existing “Akon Sutra” was not entirely influenced by future generations, and of course Shakyamuni did not directly preach the “Akon Sutra” at all.

After that, the “Mahayana Buddhist Movement” flourished in the midst of deep understanding of Shakyamuni's teachings and broadly developing that thought.

During this process, the reality became clear about Buddhas other than Shakyamuni, such as Amida Nyorai, Yakushi Nyorai, and Dainichi Nyorai. It was also in later generations that the “idea of good fortune” preached by Shakyamuni was systematized into “sky,” etc., and the various existing forms of Buddhism have been passed down in these currents.

Even if it is scientifically clear what the historical actual Siddhartha preached, that does not mean that it is only Buddhism, nor does it mean that Siddhartha is the only Buddha.

What is a Buddha and what is not a Buddha is an issue only in and around the question of whether you become a Buddha yourself or not. If you don't become a Buddha yourself, then the fact that Shakyamuni is a Buddha is also a made-up story. Also, if it is clear that you are a Buddha, you will notice that Shakyamuni is a Buddha, and that Buddha who is not Shakyamuni is also a Buddha.

Among the teachings of Buddhism, there is deep knowledge and philosophical ideas about this world. However, Buddhism is not about knowledge, the art of doing business, or philosophy. Buddhism is a general term for teachings and practices that will surely make you a Buddha.

Incidentally, in my case, Shakyamuni said, “A Buddha called Amida Nyorai saves me. It is the Buddha who appeared in order to clarify the truth that “the evidence is now reaching me with Namu Amida Buddha” will be revealed in this world.

Buddha statues other than Shakyamuni are not fictional stories.

Monks are believers, aren't they? It's hot. It's getting hot (laughs)
Many monks answered, so I thought it would be good, but I couldn't play it. It's not logical since I was 5, and I've definitely been saved. The Buddha will protect you. It's been half a century since I practiced ascetic practices and became a Buddha myself. It wasn't possible to go through.
Faith is believing. Actually, I don't know because I can't go to the Pure Land of Paradise until I die, but since Buddha, the living Buddha, said that there are all great monks, I believe there are. I am receiving your absolute blessings and teachings. We don't want to experience miracles. I don't care about that. This is because if you dismiss it as a coincidence, it's a coincidence. Whether you think of that as a result of the Buddha or a coincidence is something that you think is the protagonist of your life. There is a saying that the Buddha is real, but if you only trust something that exists, you won't believe it unless a miracle happens.
Then, the teachings that the Buddha preached will become fantasies rather than teachings. Paradoxically speaking, isn't the Buddha just a dreamer? I can trust the Buddha, though. Not believing other Buddhas seems like self-contradiction. Buddhism is the path to becoming a Buddha. It doesn't matter if the Buddha actually exists or not. Faith is a story about the spiritual world, the world of the soul. It's hard for us to pray for a Buddha statue without a purpose, so it's the Buddha that we idolized. More specifically, it has no appearance, no shape, no color, smell, or sign, but I think it is the Buddha who is close to you, protects, and nurtures you. Even though thousands of years have passed, this is how the Buddha is among you. This is a miracle. I think it shows the existence of the Buddha. Namu Amida.
Please be happy and do your best.

Toko-sama

There is a saying that lies are convenient, but if they really were lies, the sutras wouldn't have survived for this long. By all means, I would be happy if you could continue to learn and practice Buddhism, aiming for an approach to the underlying truth.

The following is just for your reference.

Honestly, Shakyamuni was not allowed to leave teachings in letters, so it is highly doubtful whether the sutras expressed and handed down in letters to future generations can be taken as true teachings of Shakyamuni without fear of misunderstanding, and if anything expressed in letters is not Shakyamuni's teachings, then it is no exaggeration in a sense to say that everything expressed in letters is a “made-up story.”

Why wasn't Shakyamuni allowed to write his teachings...

In my humble opinion, I think it's because there is such a thing as “transcription → fixation of concepts → perception of reality → obsession → hesitation and suffering.”

Also, even if you conceptualize the denial of transcriptionization as “outrageous,” “far-fetched,” “far-fetched theory,” “far-fetched theory,” the same thing could happen, and after all, it would be inappropriate.

However, when it comes to how exactly we should study and practice Buddhism with the teachings of Shakyamuni, there is no way for us to learn and practice those teachings other than relying on the sutras.

Of course, the scriptures are not unfounded teachings. It can be thought that there is a convenient position in each sutra, such as being one aspect of the myriad teachings of Shakyamuni, which is said to be 84,000, summarized or promised.

Master Asanga uses the term “the purest Dharma equivalent flow” in “The Theory of Regent Dharma,” but I believe that it is necessary to carefully examine and handle the contents of the sutras, assuming that it is a teaching flowing out of the pure world of truth.

The problem is, then, it is necessary to carefully determine which sutras and the teachings in them can or should be relied upon (for oneself and each sentient being).

Question “Types of sutras”
http://goo.gl/jMyf57

Question “Dragon Tree and Consciousness”
http://goo.gl/GnWUpc

Kawaguchi Hidetoshi Gassho