Short Answers to FAQ on Buddhism
1. What
is the central teachings of the Chinese Pure Land School?
2. I
read that “faith” is the only requirement to be reborn in the Pure Land. Is
this true?
3. So,
is the teachings of Jodo Shinshu wrong?
4. Which
sutras are the Pure Land teachings based on?
5. Somehow,
the teachings of Pure Land seems closer to Christianity than Buddhism
7. Must
Buddhists become vegetarians?
8. 3.
The Four Noble Truths made simple
The main aim of all Chinese Pure Land practitioners is to be reborn in the Western Pure Land of Amitabha Buddha. There are 3 conditions that the practitioner must possess in order to achieve this: faith, motivation, and practice.
The practitioner must have faith in that Amitabha’s Pure Land exists and it is possible to be reborn there. Actually, this condition is a prerequisite for the following conditions. If you don’t even believe such a Pure Land exist, you will never want to be reborn there, will never practise to be reborn there, much less able to be reborn there.
This second condition has often been translated as “vow”. However, I feel that motivation or detachment conveys the meaning of this condition better. Motivation means that the practitioner is willing and motivated to be reborn in Amitabha’s Pure Land. Detachment means we are willing to give up our relationships and possession in this world to be reborn in the Pure Land. This is really easier said than done. If we have any attachment to this world at the time of death, no matter how strong our faith, no matter how diligence our practice, even if Amitabha appears before us at death, we will not be willing to follow his lead to the Pure Land.
The last condition is, of course, practice. The Buddha taught a number of ways to practice to be reborn in the Pure Land. The most popular and the one most widely recommended is that of reciting Amitabha’s name. In the Pure Land sutras, it is said that one can be reborn in the Pure Land for as little as 10 repetitions of Amitabha’s name. However, this is only achievable in very special circumstances, and should not be relied upon as the recommended practice with definite results. The minimum practice recommended is 10 breaths of recitation of Amitabha’s name, once in the morning, and once in the evening, for everyday.
Besides reciting the Buddha’s name, the general practice of morality, concentration and wisdom should not be forgotten. Without these 3 practices, it would be very difficult to keep a clear mind at the time of death to recall the Buddha’s name. This moment of death is the most crucial in determining whether we’ll be reborn in the Pure Land. It is this moment that even one recitation will get us there, and a single thought of attachment will drag us crashing back to samsara even if we have recited a thousand million times.
Not as I understand it. As explained earlier, the three requirements for rebirth in the Pure Land are faith, motivation and practice. Faith is arguably the most important requirement of the three, but it alone is not enough.
This misconception may have arises from the teachings of Jodo Shinshu(aka Shin), which is the form of Pure Land Buddhism the West is most familiar with. Jodo Shinshu was founded by the Japanese monk Shinran, who reinterpreted the Pure Land sutras and concluded that there is so much evil in this world that, it is very difficult to achieve enlightenment by ourselves. Instead, we can only rely on our faith in Amitabha Buddha’s power to save us from the evils of the world.
I am in no position to judge whether the teachings of Shin is right or wrong because I’ve not studied it deeply. All I can say is that it is a reinterpretation of the Jodo Shu (the Japanese pronunication of the Chinese characters for Pure Land School) teachings. Its founder, Shinran lived at the time in Japan where the Buddhist monks had become very corrupted with power and wealth. He was persecuted for his opposition to the corruption in the Sangha system of his time. It is thus not surprising that he reinterpreted the teachings of Jodo Shu, for it would be very difficult to convince anyone the tradition teachings given the corrupt state of the Sangha at that time. A reinterpretation was needed to regain people’s faith in the religion. Shinran called his new teachings Jodo Shinshu (the True Pure Land School). It is a similar story with Nichiren, who reinterpreted the Lotus Sutra to found Nichiren Shinshu.
I have no problem with reinterpretation of the teachings to suit the circumstances of the time the founders are born in. Unfortunately, many modern followers of these new Buddhism schools are still insisting that theirs is the only correct interpretation of the teachings. This is something that I cannot agree with.
Traditionally, the three sutras that focus on Amitabha’s Pure Land are: The Larger Amitabha Sutra, the Smaller Amitabha Sutra, and the Sutra On Visualising Amitabha Buddha. However, Amitabha and His Pure Land are also mentioned in many other Mahayana Sutras. Two other sutras have been included in the “must-read” list for practitioners: The chapter on the Universal Practices and Vows of Samantabhadra Bodhisattva of the Flower Adornment Sutra, and the chapter on Ksitigarbha Bodhisattva Reciting the Buddha’s Name of the Surangama Sutra.
The Larger Amitabha Sutra is the main sutra. It talks about the who, why, what, where, how, when of Amitabha and His Pure Land. The Smaller Amitabha Sutra is like a summary of the essential teachings of the Larger sutra. It is the most popular of all the Pure Land sutras because it is included in the evening liturgy text of Chinese Buddhism, so it is the most widely read Pure Land sutra. The Visualisation Sutra teaches one how to be reborn in the Pure Land by visualization means.
Not at all. Pure Land Buddhism does not deny the other teachings of the Buddha. Pure Land is but one of the many ways of gaining enlightenment. While we believed that it is the most suitable practice for most people, we do not insist that it is the only way, or it is suitable for everyone. Also, as described earlier, one still has to practice diligently morality, concentration and wisdom, like in all other schools of Buddhism. It is not a simple case of believe and be saved.
The concept of rebirth in a Pure Land is not something unique to the Pure Land school in Buddhism. Even in Theravada Buddhism which denies the existence of Amitabha and His Pure Land, it is crucial that at the moment of death, the dying person should be reminded of the Buddha and the teachings. Tibetan Buddhism also teaches that at death is the opportunity for gaining enlightenment. If we can seize the opportunity at the correct moment at the time of death, we can gain enlightenment there and then. But it takes a highly realized master to be able to recognize these moments. For ordinary beings like us, if we can recall our practices and the buddhas and bodhisattvas while in the bardo state, we too can gain enlightenment by the power of the enlightened beings(Tibetan Book of the Living and Dying – Sogyal Rinpoche). This is exactly the teachings of the Pure Land school! In fact, some Pure Land teachers has said that Pure Land is a “no-brainer” version of Tibetan Buddhism.
By fate, we usually mean something that is predestined, the outcome already cast in stone even before you are born. In this sense, karma is not fate. Karma is a middle path between the two extremes of fate and randomness. Both extremes would imply that there is nothing much you can do to change your destiny. The karma explanation moderates the extremes by saying that you are responsible for your actions.
By emphasizing on self responsibility, those with a proper view of karma are able to gain great strength in times of adversity, would not be conceited when they are in a advantageous position, and will continue to uphold morality and integrity whatever good or bad things happen. However, a misunderstanding of karma can have the opposite effect, as had happened in certain parts of the Western world. There, karma is misunderstood as a justification by the rich and privileged for indulgence, and down trodding the poor and disadvantaged. They take the view that because of their good karma, they deserve the indulgence, while the disadvantaged are suffering their just retribution and deserve no pity. Of course this is a wrong view of karma because they only focus on their past actions, the responsibilities of their current action have been ignored.
In the karma explanation, the outcome is determined by a myriads of causes, both physical and non-physical, one of which might be an action of yours in the past, even as far back as in a previous life. The actual interaction between these causes is so complex that even the Buddha had difficulty predicting what is the outcome given a set of interacting causes. However, as a general rule of thumb, when a very virtuous action or a very violent action is carried out, it can become the dominant cause and the effects of other causes is comparatively overshadowed.
The short answer is no. The long answer? It depends. Read on for more.
Vegetarianism is arguably the most controversial issue in Buddhism. The Theravada school of Buddhism denies the need for vegetarianism. They point, as proof, to the episode in which the Buddha rejected Devadatta’s request to impose vegetarianism as one of the rules the Sangha should observe. The Mahayana schools, on the other hand, quoted many Mahayana sutras in which the Buddha actively discourages eating meat. Even then, interestingly enough, vegetarianism is something only unique to Chinese Buddhism. The other Mahayana schools of Tibetan, Japanese and Korean Buddhism does not enforce strict vegetarianism.
To understand why this is so, we need to look at the way the different schools and traditions organize the Sangha. Traditionally, monks go on alm rounds to get food. They are supposed to accept with gratitude whatever food that is offered to them, be it meat or vegetables, delicious or bland. It would be impractical to observe vegetarianism if they cannot choose the food they want to accept.
However, the practice of going on alms has died out in China. This is because in the past, many Chinese emperors had persecuted Buddhism and monks, accusing them as parasites of society. The reason the emperors gave was that monks beg for food and did not contribute (at least economically) to the society. To avoid persecution, the monks in China have no choice but to abandon the practice of begging for alms. The temples had to become self-sufficient. Monks had to work in the fields and grow their own food. (The monk credited for this reform is the Chan(Zen) master, ???, who has the famous saying, “One day without work, one day without food.”)
It is thus impossible for Chinese monks to eat meat without breaking the first precept. I personally believe that practicality is one of the major factors affecting the different approaches to vegetarianism. The Theravada monks could not be fussy about food, and the lay people in this region are not so rich as to prepare special food for the monks. They could only offer what they have. To impose vegetarianism would cause great inconvenience for both monks and the lay people. The Chinese monks find that they could live by without eating meat, so it becomes one of their precepts that they need to observe, and rightly so.
We must remember that the basic motive behind vegetarianism is compassion. Even in the Theravada tradition, monks will not accept the meat they are offered if they know that the animal had been purposely killed for the offering, or if they have heard or seen the animal being killed. Being a vegetarian is just one way of practicing compassion, but unfortunately being a vegetarian does not necessarily imply you are compassionate. It is always easier to focus on the means than the end???, or as the Zen guys would say, ”Looking at the finger rather than the moon.” I have met many Buddhists, especially the uneducated ones, who sincerely believe that they are more compassionate than others, just because they are vegetarians. Their daily actions prove otherwise of course.
However, for those who have already live a very compassionate live, and are not yet vegetarians, perhaps you would like to up your compassion one notch by helping to reduce the demand for slaughter of animals for food.
i) Suffering is a characteristic of existence.
ii) The real causes of suffering are not external, but are the internal negative states like greed, hatred and ignorance.
iii) The end of suffering can be achieved by getting rid of our internal negative states like greed, hatred and ignorance.
iv) There are many ways to end suffering by getting rid of our internal negative states. Despite the differences in outward appearance, all of them share the common goals of increasing your morality, concentration and wisdom to reduce the internal negative states of greed, hatred and ignorance.