If the Buddha had been born in Texas in 1950, would the dharma still teach about 10 realms, divas, and rebirth?

The question is impossible to answer. But it's another way to frame the question: "How much of the Buddha's teaching is a product of the time and culture of his upbringing?"

Sorry about making yet another thread like this. I've read a lot of threads similar to this one, but I haven't found a satisfying answer.

There is this saying that if all of humanity was wiped out for a billion years and another intelligent species took our place, the Christian Bible in its entirety would be lost forever. There is no way to independently derive the ten commandments or the Genesis origin story without the cultural and historical context in which they were written. However, most science books would look the same.

I believe the Four Noble Truths, even the Eightfold Path or the Middle Way could be independently derived. Maybe they would be framed differently, but the core of the teachings would be the same. That is why they are so amazing.

It's no surprise to me that many people rarely question the fallibility of the Buddha. Many of his teachings seem like pure genius to me, and the lifetime works of other contemplative geniuses have only supported, not repudiated, his message. But there is some pretty weird stuff going on at the periphery of this religion. I have this dissonance in my mind because I wonder why such a brilliant set of teachings about suffering and karma feels the need to make claims about whether there is a realm of gods or not. Or whether stream-entry gaurantees enlightenment in 7 rebirths.

Sometimes it feels like I'm reading the Lord of the Rings or something. How can the Buddha claim to know this stuff? But he was right about so many other huge things.

Any thoughts or advice appreciated.

submitted by /u/plumshark
[link] [comments]

from Buddhism https://ift.tt/2RdCb7v