Oversimplifying Buddhism
A prithagjana (a worldly non-spiritual person) who is curious enough about Buddhism to take it up might say something like this:
Buddhism is not a complicated religion, requiring years of practice and monastic training and discipline. All that we have to do is to follow the 5 precepts which consists of avoiding the onslaught of creatures. Not taking what is not given. Staying clear of sexual misconduct. Avoiding lying speech, and substance abuse.
Wait a minute! Where does nirvana come into the picture? Perhaps it doesn't because it is too complicated. Understanding the importance of nirvana might require, at the least, being familiar with the important discourses the Buddha gave to his followers. That might take a year or two to master.
In light of what has been said, is practicing the five precepts all there is to the Buddhism of the noble ones (arya-sravaka) who have entered the supermundane path (arya-mârga), or is there a lot more complicated and subtle stuff to learn? No doubt there is more—much more. Focusing merely on the five precepts is like believing that just four tires is a car.
When I hear or read prithagjinas trying to oversimplify Buddhism I can't help but thinking that this is wrong. It is one think to admit, honestly, to ourselves that we don't have what it takes to enter the supermundane path. It's quite another matter to oversimplify Buddhism in effect hiding what it is really about, so that something like nirvana, and the path to it, end up eventually becoming ignored.
Comments
Post a Comment