What are the grounds for venerating the Buddha vis-a-vis EBTs stance on life?

[Gabriel]

I don’t object your criticism at all. We should question those in power and investigate if they live up to their claims or just represent a rusty socio-religious structure. Just current practice and the different layers of text play in different registers.

Also for the sake of discussion I would clearly separate EBT topics and contemporary practice, otherwise the discussion will fragment without any direction.

[irene]

@Metaphor

@irene

In contrast obtaining the respect of kings just because you shave your head and put on a robe, does not feel right and does not make any sense to me.

When I completed my Ph.D. I received a doctoral robe and hood. They hang on a hook on the back of my office door. I understand that there is a university in the southern United States where professors are encouraged by the administration to wear their robes to class to instill in students a sense of veneration for the wisdom imparted by the faculty. From what I hear from colleagues familiar with that university, few professors actually don their robes and wear them to class, perhaps out of a sense that it unnecessarily puts on airs and might come across as pompous. And yet, I wouldn’t be surprised if students actually like it when instructors occasionally do come in their academic robes to class. Perhaps a bit of “pomp and circumstances” from time to time lends a scholarly air to the proceedings. Maybe one of these days I will wear my robe to class and see how my students respond. Perhaps on a cold day, so I have another reason for doing so

well when I was a student one of the lecturers used to put on a gown. That actually put me off because I found him pompous and in retrospect I think I paid less attention to his lectures than they deserved.
In contrast, my favorite lecturer came wearing jeans. In retrospect I think I overestimated him
So probably I have the opposite problem, since the ideal (very hard to attain) would be to appreciate the message of a person independently of their appearance.
I think Walt Disney conducted interviews in a way that he was not able to see the candidate, in order not to be affected.
DaisakU Ikeda wears a suit and tie though, and I do appreciate him even though I do not like the outfit.

[Mat]

Most monks have defilements, including conceit. When a person venerates a monk they aren’t strictly respecting the monk but also the ‘robe’. That is, the the robe represents the qualities of an arahanth- maybe you could call it their potential. To say they changed into robes and cut their hair is to underestimate the transformation. As we have no value in it, we the monk or nun as pretty much similar to us- this is a common misperception and Eastern societies have an understanding about this. To venerate someone who is like us would be an issue for my ego- and I used to ‘use’ veneration to show up my ‘hidden’ conceit, about myself and my ‘wonderful’ qualities, until my defilement couldn’t bother me anymore.

In Buddhism we focus on internal problems on the main. If we can help other, it’s a bonus, but it can be unrewarding sometimes. Monks feeling entitled or developing conceit is an issue- perhaps more for their practice. There are bad eggs in any group of people- I’m just happy if they aren’t inciting race violence, though I wouldn’t worship them- rather report them to the powers that be!

As every moment is impermanent, watching this impermanence with mindfulness for a few days if not weeks, we come to a realisation that such second to second impermanence is unsatisfactory or dukkha, yet it is a truth. Then there is no clingable experiences, and it allows the mind to go beyond all experiencing which then becomes the ceasing of suffering, or Nibbana, AFAIK.

with metta

[tonysharp]

@Metaphor

From my understanding, the Buddha did not say that life is the cause of suffering. The cause of suffering is clinging to attachments. When we let go of our clinging we can end suffering, which is not the same thing as ending life , inasmuch as it is not life which causes suffering but those aspects of life (clinging to attachments) which are the source suffering.

Precisely. The teaching on dependent origination really drives home this point.

@irene

As far as I understand the aim of EBT is to attain nibbana and so to be free of all realms, including the deva realms (assuming they exist), because they are also ultimately unsatisfactory.

Nibbana is the certainly goal; however, as demonstrated in suttas like SN 55.7, the Buddha didn’t prescribe the same fast lane to that goal to everyone.

Theravadin circles often blur the distinction between the monastic and lay teachings, which, understandably, causes confusion. The teachings directed to lay followers aren’t as uncompromising as those given to monastics. Some paths in the EBT like AN 6.10 are almost Pure Land-esque in practice, but—I assume to placate secular seekers—they aren’t as discussed here. Or maybe there’s a lack of interest.

[karl_lew]

@irene

I understand that Buddhism in EBT sees the whole of life as objectionable, because it is suffering

Wait. What?

Irene, life just is. It comes. It goes. Life is not suffering. Delight is the root of suffering. To see life as objectionable is to reject it, to abhor it, to hate it. That objection to life is also dhukka and an aspect of suffering (as in greed, hate, delusion). Life is not suffering. Suffering arises out of unhealthy relationship with transience. Delight is the root of suffering because delight slips and slides into greed, hate and delusion. Life is not the problem. Delight is the burning spark that burns the house down.