[K-Articles 1] Buddhism is an Intellectual Religion

[buddi]

Hello, I translated an article about the nature of Buddism that was originally written in Korean. I’d love to share it with you and hear your thoughts!

---

Buddhism is an Intellectual Religion

by Sungsig Yoon
PhD in Buddhist Studies, Dongguk University
PhD in Business Administration, University of California, Berkeley
Former Professor, University of Texas at Austin

---

God the Father is a title given to God in Christianity, and so believers call themselves “the children of God”. Although not explicitly stated in scripture, Mary is also regarded as the mother of believers.

In Buddhism, there is no concept of “Buddha the Father,” nor are there references to “Children of Buddha.” Such familial metaphors are not part of Buddhist doctrine. This is because Buddhism views the relationship between Buddha and laypeople as that of a teacher and students.

Buddhism is often described as an intellectual religion. It is grounded in a profound philosophical and psychological system. Understanding the essence of Buddhism requires a college-level depth study. An academic approach is necessary to understand Buddhism.

In China, Zen Buddhism is misinterpretted as disregarding the scriptures, and thie view has also been spread to Korea. In some cases, Zen (禪) practitioners even believe that studying the scripture lowers their dignity. Looking at the Early Buddhist Text in which Buddha’s life and words are recorded just as they are, this misconception of Zen Buddhism to ignore Buddhist doctrine is greatly wrong. I think the biggest misunderstanding in Buddhism is that studying the scriptures is a lower-level practice, and that Dhyana is a superior kind of practice that will teach you a better self-knowledge.

Ignoring the Early Buddhist Text and Buddha’s original teachings will never lead to a true understanding of Buddhist doctrine. Such practice is no different from the kind of “mind training” often associated with yoga practice.

Attempting to awaken yourself through seated meditation alone, without an soilid understanding of buddhist values about the world and humanity, is bound to fail. Likewise, solely praying without knowledge leads nowhere. Dhyana should be part of Buddhism study, but not everything.

[Danny]

Hi buddi,

Welcome to the D&D forum! We hope you enjoy the various resources, FAQs, and previous threads. We encourage you to use the search function for topics and keywords you are interested in.

We also ask you to please take a moment now to familiarize yourself with the forum guidelines: Forum Guidelines. May some of these resources be of assistance along the path.

If you have any questions or need further clarification regarding anything, feel free to contact the moderators by including @moderators in your post or a PM.

Regards,
Danny (on behalf of the moderators)

[Dogen]

Interesting points. There’s a few things I would object to though, respectfully…

@buddi

In Buddhism, there is no concept of “Buddha the Father,” nor are there references to “Children of Buddha.” Such familial metaphors are not part of Buddhist doctrine.

This is just false though. Mendicants repeaedly refer to themselves as children of Buddha, in places like Thig, Thag, Iti. Albeit I admit, it occurs much less frequently compared to christian metaphors.

@buddi

I think the biggest misunderstanding in Buddhism is that studying the scriptures is a lower-level practice, and that Dhyana is a superior kind of practice that will teach you a better self-knowledge.

I think this position (jhana being superior to reading scriptures) is supported in the suttas themselves, in places like Kalama Sutta (“Do not rely on scriptures…”), places like DHP (“Those who read a lot but do not practise don’t benefit from holy life, those who read little and practice a lot profit from the holy life”), and further emphasis on liberation through sammasati. Scriptures form a guiding pillar, but walking the path (that is, jhana) is what makes one liberated, not studying the map (reading scriptures).

@buddi

Attempting to awaken yourself through seated meditation alone, without an soilid understanding of buddhist values about the world and humanity, is bound to fail.

Worked for Buddha himself. He didn’t rely on any canonical scriptures. So I’d be cautious to make such declarations.

I’m not trying to dismiss the value and importance of the suttas. Maps are useful. But you can find your way even without a map, albeit much more difficultly. However, without walking the path, you can never actually reach the destination.

Suttas tell us to walk the path, that’s why they’re useful and sacred. I appreciate the attempt of the author to highlight the importance of suttas, as I love suttas myself as well, but I’m wondering if some of his claims are a bit exaggerated.

@buddi

Buddhism is often described as an intellectual religion. It is grounded in a profound philosophical and psychological system. Understanding the essence of Buddhism requires a college-level depth study. An academic approach is necessary to understand Buddhism.

Understanding the essence of Buddhism (a very loaded sentence!) does require an intensely intellectual and wide perspective. Does that mean liberation, nirvana also depend on these things?

Suttas are full of people attaining nirvana based on a sermon, a poem, things very simple. Repeatedly in suttas, it’s said that “Doing good, not doing evil, purifying the mind is the teaching of the Buddhas”.

It’s a very simple instruction to throw a dart at bullseyes. It’s still a very difficult thing to do it.

Sometimes I fear we might be over-intellectualising things.

But then again, what do I know to talk about the essence of Buddhism?

Thanks a lot for your translation work and sharing it here though!! These things are always valuable, and many might agree with the points you’ve wanted to bring across.

[BethL]

Hi buddi,

@buddi

hear your thoughts

Could you be more specific about what type of feedback you’re requesting?

Thank you

[Alex70]

@buddi

Buddhism is often described as an intellectual religion. It is grounded in a profound philosophical and psychological system. Understanding the essence of Buddhism requires a college-level depth study. An academic approach is necessary to understand Buddhism.

Sorry, Buddi but I respectfully disagree. Ajahn Chah, Ajahn Mun etc didn’t do any “college-level depth study” and look at those great Masters.

In my opinion Buddhism is hearing the teaching and putting it into praxis. When one then sees that it’s true what Buddha taught, one carries on following the path.

[marinoklisovich]

@buddi

Buddhism is often described as an intellectual religion. It is grounded in a profound philosophical and psychological system. Understanding the essence of Buddhism requires a college-level depth study. An academic approach is necessary to understand Buddhism.

Buddhas Path is grounded in the conceptual understanding of the Suttas and practice of meditation. Theoretical ‘understanding’ alone is phony; real understanding comes when we gain experience from meditation and reflect the Teachings of Buddha in our practice. Pondering on theoretical doctrines is like licking the label of a honey jar–you won’t get the taste of honey in this way. The essence of the Teachings of Buddha becomes known to those who continuously meditate and implement the instructions of Buddha in their lives.

[Khemarato.bhikkhu]

@Alex70

Ajahn Chah, Ajahn Mun etc didn’t do any “college-level depth study”

Well, they were also born in Thailand and thus grew up in a Buddhist culture since they were very young. Maybe not “college-level” but those of us (Americans, Koreans, etc) who grew up in a largely Christian / Materialist culture do need some remedial education!

[brunobr]

Greetings @buddi, welcome to the Forum.

Faith-Follower & Dhamma-Follower

It is mostly understood that stream-entry (sotāpatti) is the first level of an irreversible shift from being a wordling (puthujjana). Several passages have a different view and list two levels before that, namely the faith-follower (saddhānusārī) and the dhamma-follower (dhammānusārī). From the two the dhamma-follower is always ranked higher than the faith-follower. Defining the Faith- and Dhamma-Follower SN 48.12 - SN 48.17, SN 48.24 mention the two, but don’t mention a specific faith or teach…

There is attainment based on intellectual understanding (wisdom) and also attainment based on faith. It depends on the qualities of the practitioner. However, all those who attain sotāpatti-magga must possess the following spiritual faculties: faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom.

A Dhamma-follower (dhammānusārī) develops wisdom before faith. Yet without faith, it is not possible to fully understand the Dhamma.

[thomaslaw]

@buddi

I translated an article about the nature of Buddism that was originally written in Korean. I’d love to share it with you and hear your thoughts!

@buddi

Ignoring the Early Buddhist Text and Buddha’s original teachings will never lead to a true understanding of Buddhist doctrine.

Do you know which Early Buddhist Text the author (Sungsig Yoon) refers to for the nature of Buddhism?