Vagaond,
What is with the use of alters in Buddhism?
The alters are not for the Buddha, but for us. As we focus on the virtues of the Buddha and the teachings, we meditate on the virtues and qualities we wish to develop within us.
Think of a Buddhist alter as a mirror to who we wish to see and become in our practice.
If a religion is going to sell, it has to offer stuff to the masses — like magic, petition prayer etc…. Altars are part of that picture. Then, after than normal religious magic stuff creeps in, the non-religious folks (the philosophical buddhists) reinterpret that stuff to try and convince the other philosophical members to not be repulsed by it. They offer interpretations like you did. OK, I guess you can do that. But go to Asia or to Buddhist temples in the area — people bring their magic religious minds to that alter and it makes them happy. The rest of us… well, sometimes we just can’t take it no matter how much spin ya put on it !
There are two types of Buddhists: dhamma followers (dhammanusari) and faith followers (saddanusari). The reason why Dhammanusari Buddhist practice Buddhism is to work through the eightfold path and achieve greater aspects of wisdom, ethics and concentration. Nevertheless, when you speak of those who are “culturally” Buddhists, they are usually saddanusari; and put their cultural faith into Buddhism– leading to idolotry, mysticism, etc.
Ajahn Chah told a story of a Thai general who would come to him asking for a charm to protect him from bullets. They were common in Thailand and there are many that believe in such talismans. Ajahn Chah refused three times and finally told him that he would give the general a Buddha charm that would protect him from bullets. Ajahn Chah was a forest monk, who practices the pure teachings of the Buddha and was considered to be enlightened. He walked the general into the temple area and put a rope around the large eight foot stone statue of the Buddha and said, “Here is your talisman. I guarantee this Buddha will stop any bullet.
Buddhism is not a faith of worshiping mystical beings, but understanding the teachings fo the Buddha.
I wager that for every Buddhist, there is a mixture of these two types in their hearts. No one has pure motivations (well, no one I know – smile !)
Besides those two types, you for got additional types (I don’t know if there are Pali words for these):
a third type of Buddhist: Lazy Buddhist
And a Fourth: Cafeteria Buddhist (just as there are Cafeteria Christians)
And a Fifth: Beat Buddhist (grab the cool sounding version easiest for them)
And probably many more. I know I have all of them in me.
We have many minds, we do not have one mind, we do not have no mind !
A Buddhist who is not practicing is not really a Buddhist, they are just fashionably using a label. The same would be true with anything, faith-based or not. So Lazy, Cafeteria, Beat, or whatever label you give them– if they are not practicing, they are not practicing.
As far as a mixture, I can say that I am not a saddanusari.
So, to what degree must they practice?
How pure until YOU will let them be a Buddhist?
You sound like my Christian friends who debate who really qualifies as a Christian.
Must one sit quietly daily, every other day, weekly?
Can one sit quietly every day, keep kosher but have a monkey mind all day long and still qualify?
What about meditate occassionally, be aware much more that before and self-identify?
What about be you — the ultimate buddhist?
I am sure part of your mind is saddanusari — you have yet to understand mind (unless you are levitating while I type).
No. What I am saying is that if you are a cafeteria Buddhist, you are reading books and not practicing. If I are lazy, then you are not practicing. If you are just being fashionable, then you are not practicing. A Christian is only required to believe to be Christian, because that is what being a Christian is. A Buddhist is required to do more than believe; they must be on the Middle Path. It is a proactive faith that requires engagement. This does not mean that you must be enlightened to be Buddhist. In fact, if you are enlightened you no longer need Buddhism.
I do not come to Buddhism from a cultural aspect, so I am not bound into the same conditioning and mindset as many Buddhists. I also work with many different traditions, so I am also keenly aware of what is Buddhism dhamma and what is liturgical culture.
While there is confidence in the dhamma, and I am a Buddhist; however, I do not believe in Buddhism as a religion.