What makes you a Buddhist?

StormWarrior

What thoughts and/or actions do you have to have to be able to rightfully call yourself a Buddhist?

Asiaprod

That is a BIG question. In theory you agree with the four fundamental discoveries (the 4 Nobel truths) the Buddha made under the Bodhi tree, and if you do, you can call yourself a Buddhist. You could also agree with some of them, discard others, and still say that in general one is a Buddhist. It is after all, just a name or an identification tag. One is a Buddhist by how one lives one's life.

Here is a nice simplified explanation of the The four Nobel Truths (sorry, I do not remember where I copied these from as it was a long time ago). It is a bit long, but I think worth the read:)

1. Life means suffering.
To live means to suffer, because the human nature is not perfect and neither is the world we live in. During our lifetime, we inevitably have to endure physical suffering such as pain, sickness, injury, tiredness, old age, and eventually death; and we have to endure psychological suffering like sadness, fear, frustration, disappointment, and depression. Although there are different degrees of suffering and there are also positive experiences in life that we perceive as the opposite of suffering, such as ease, comfort and happiness, life in its totality is imperfect and incomplete, because our world is subject to impermanence. This means we are never able to keep permanently what we strive for, and just as happy moments pass by, we ourselves and our loved ones will pass away one day, too.

2. The origin of suffering is attachment.
The origin of suffering is attachment to transient things and the ignorance thereof. Transient things do not only include the physical objects that surround us, but also ideas, and -in a greater sense- all objects of our perception. Ignorance is the lack of understanding of how our mind is attached to impermanent things. The reasons for suffering are desire, passion, ardour, pursuit of wealth and prestige, striving for fame and popularity, or in short: craving and clinging. Because the objects of our attachment are transient, their loss is inevitable, thus suffering will necessarily follow. Objects of attachment also include the idea of a "self" which is a delusion, because there is no abiding self. What we call "self" is just an imagined entity, and we are merely a part of the ceaseless becoming of the universe.

3. The cessation of suffering is attainable.
The cessation of suffering can be attained through nirodha. Nirodha means the unmaking of sensual craving and conceptual attachment. The third noble truth expresses the idea that suffering can be ended by attaining dispassion. Nirodha extinguishes all forms of clinging and attachment. This means that suffering can be overcome through human activity, simply by removing the cause of suffering. Attaining and perfecting dispassion is a process of many levels that ultimately results in the state of Nirvana. Nirvana means freedom from all worries, troubles, complexes, fabrications and ideas. Nirvana is not comprehensible for those who have not attained it.

4. The path to the cessation of suffering.
There is a path to the end of suffering - a gradual path of self-improvement, which is described more detailed in the Eightfold Path. It is the middle way between the two extremes of excessive self-indulgence (hedonism) and excessive self-mortification (asceticism); and it leads to the end of the cycle of rebirth. The latter quality discerns it from other paths which are merely "wandering on the wheel of becoming", because these do not have a final object. The path to the end of suffering can extend over many lifetimes, throughout which every individual rebirth is subject to karmic conditioning. Craving, ignorance, delusions, and its effects will disappear gradually, as progress is made on the path.

From my own perspective it is good to bear the following in mind

• There are a million variations as written by the different sects, but they all boil down fundamentally to saying the same thing.
• The essence of Buddhism is change, everything, including Buddhism, is subject to change
• At the time that the Buddha expounded these truths it was generally taught that only members of the monastic order (both men and women) could attain enlightenment, the laity through their good work of caring for the monastics and leading an appropriate life could guarantee themselves better circumstance in their next life. This is not the case today, Buddhism has expanded to recognize that all can attain enlightenment.

As with the Gospels in Christianity, the explanation of the four Nobel Truths has also evolved, but the principles underlying them remains constant.

su123

Hi Asia,

Good explanation. Always enjoy your input. (been reading the posts for a while but I just joined the forum today)

Can I just clarify one thing? I think lay people did become enlightened in the Buddha's time. There are lots of stories in the texts about them. But once they are fully enlightened, they don't see any point to living a lay-life and become ordained. And also, in my opinion, it was encouraged for people who were serious about the path to become a monk or a nun as that life is more suitable for it.

Su

Asiaprod

su123 wrote: »

Hi Asia,

Good explanation. Always enjoy your input. (been reading the posts for a while but I just joined the forum today)

Can I just clarify one thing? I think lay people did become enlightened in the Buddha's time. There are lots of stories in the texts about them. But once they are fully enlightened, they don't see any point to living a lay-life and become ordained. And also, in my opinion, it was encouraged for people who were serious about the path to become a monk or a nun as that life is more suitable for it.

Su

Hi Su, welcome. I hope some of the other posters here can shed some light on your question, often I am wrong, but that is good because I then get the opportunity to learn:) The way I explained it was the way I was taught it. I will ask this question to someone I respect to get their take on it.

I would imagine that lay people did indeed become enlightened in the Buddha's time, since enlightenment is available for anyone. I would also tend to agree that becoming a monk or nun would suit the path of Buddhism as practiced at that time, since I do believe that the monks propagated the concept that only monastics could become enlightened. However, for me, the whole point of Buddhism, in this day and age, is not to cloister oneself away from the world seeking an individual and private form of enlightenment, rather it is to play an active part in it and in this way attain enlightenment. Only by being an active participant in something can one truly understands it and effect change for both oneself and the common good.
This is probably the reason I find the issue of any celibate priest in any path giving advice on morals and ethics (and a word I dread using ethos) to the laity so hard to swallow. They are not necessarily bad people, they are just not always in touch with the same version of reality the laity have to operate in.

su123

Yes I do agree with you that monks can lose touch of what we would consider to be reality. I guess their reality is different.

But from my limited experience, I think that being away from it all doesn't necessarily mean that you can escape either. You have to face what is going on in your mind more when you don;t have anythign else to escape to.

On the other hand, I guess it depends on the individual too. Some people would find lay-life a rich source for practice while others would prefer a quieter life with less distractions. Anyway that's how I see it.

Asiaprod

su123 wrote: »

Anyway that's how I see it.

Again, no problem, each to their own as it should be. And thanks for your input, it is very valuable.:)

lukester

Heard a Tibetan lama say one time that he thought about what was really required to be a Buddhist, and it wasn't belief in the 4 Noble Truths or faith in the 3 Jewels of Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, but simply a belief that change is possible.

Kind of how I feel myself

Asiaprod

lukester wrote: »

Heard a Tibetan lama say one time that he thought about what was really required to be a Buddhist, and it wasn't belief in the 4 Noble Truths or faith in the 3 Jewels of Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, but simply a belief that change is possible.

Kind of how I feel myself

Hi Lukester, and welcome. Thanks for your input. There are many paths (ways) to follow in Buddhism. I imagine they all go to the same destination:). I have always believed that the answer to this question is "Which ever one does it for you, that is your path.
Change is indeed possible, as it is with other faiths too.

lukester

Asiaprod wrote: »

Hi Lukester, and welcome. Thanks for your input. There are many paths (ways) to follow in Buddhism. I imagine they all go to the same destination:). I have always believed that the answer to this question is "Which ever one does it for you, that is your path.
Change is indeed possible, as it is with other faiths too.

Hi Asiaprod, and thanks for the welcome. I agree, there are many ways in Buddhism, all fingers pointing at the same moon

I also believe that other faiths/traditions are equally valid and worthy of respect- it comes down to the individual and their own disposition, as you say, which ever one does it for you.

MeditationMom

I cannot answer this question successfully so I asked myself another question - what is it that makes me not yet a Buddha?

When you run out of answers to that question you are a Buddha. It can take many lifetimes and I won't bore you with my endless list.