Buddhism, Apotheosis and the History of Religion

of ancient Buddhism, modernity, and atheist
but I should say that I'm making this video I discovered in my own thinking as I grew own natural attitude toward religion, history I was raised in. questions about the history of Buddhism that the punchline to a bad joke. country, nobody seems to be offended by the of the Capitol building, showing George Washington to Pagan Rome— but, in fact, there are examples the world. the religions of Asia (both thinkingly and originally a mere mortal, but he was elevated after he died. by him developed more than just a cult following leader, and never presented himself as a god; is an entirely secular, mortal figure; nevertheless, god (one of the most visible and widespread as the natural progress of history —partly view of the Christian Bible. elevated to the status of gods after their historical figures by exaggerating their exploits assumption that the Bible is an imperfect authors thought of what they were doing (in of real events. a corpus of texts as heavily researched as harder to deal with when we shift to talking lines: a normal person becomes famous somehow leader... on this chart for simplicity, we and then the record of their all-too-human things that were originally real are made much less often: Euhemerism. are instead inserted into history; in other that these gods had been historically-real in challenging the habit of mind that looks abstract gods being made into false historical of abstract ideals, and then were later made their origins, embellishing the story by adding strong motivations for authors to do this widely-known god to a particular lineage, an impact on tourism, and you could even have Zeus was one of their own ancient kings: a the heritage of their own royal families. with the kings of Crete themselves, and apparently on the mainland, who continued to worship refused to accept him as a particular king thinking about religion, this example gives the gods down to earth: when he's reduced "Zeus almighty", but he becomes our Zeus —a a particular people, place, and political that quite a few royal families claimed to side of the screen) is fairly well-known: more and more human features added to his as an historical figure with a date of birth and so on. any of these myths and assume that the more of the story, closer to the historical truth. Apotheosis is just one way of thinking about that we (as modern readers) are imposing onto Herakles to the Buddha, and pointed out how "realistic" anecdotes about Herakles as historical seems supernatural. decision rather than a rational one. with human nature, it's easy to imagine that in contrast to other genres of mythology and Hercules any more than it does with Shakespeare's inspired by a more ancient legend, and that events. could discover the truth about those events which aspects seemed compelling to you, and spurious. to reveal history hidden underneath. to read Buddhist literature, selecting what and then speculating on the historical implications, sometimes ignoring the genre of literature grew up Atheist probably believed something characters like Robin Hood were, ultimately, although I don't think that any of the adults think this way. our reading of history, and (as I'm asking ourselves imagine that a skeptical reading a myth, instead of supposing that we might the myth. this attitude toward mythology, is that we're interpretations that fasten onto one aspect rejecting the rest of the evidence. production may not have any faith in the religion producing something new (not discovering something on-screen were men who sincerely believed their own versions of "the historical Jesus", the Bible story and then removing others. of social change in their own times, and they (and politics), not with the past. to support Jefferson's idea of a secularized of the story; the whole exercise was creative, as an advocate for the poor was a creative the future of the religion, without any pretense from the historical past. present themselves as religious leaders nor exercise reflects this same pattern of thinking: of apotheosis, and we therefore look at myths from them, to reveal something historically that his version of Jesus was more authentic most religious leaders are not nearly so detached very common for brand new reconstructions definitive and more ancient than the versions asserted as such with all due seriousness of Apotheosis was applied to Buddhism constantly and scholars. that the ancient texts arrived in the modern lacking any sense of which texts came first, ancient form of Buddhism should be weighed. the texts that seemed "most human" as being as a god; however, it's understandable because doing with Jesus, Romulus, Hercules, and many like "Early Buddhism" have become synonymous of Buddhism is arrived at through the same of his own version of the Bible (simply, deleting his own preference). my own, earliest videos on Youtube repeatedly ancient, I do not mean it is more rational, the historical precedence of the texts. a number of anecdotes: many academics today historical Buddha" in a really incoherent in an earlier video, also). peer-review he received (and this shows that rejection sometimes) in which the reviewer Buddha whatsoever belonged in the 19th century, be published. wear robes or wear suits and ties, we're talking here. involved many Asians (monks, scholars, even Buddhist Asia, in places as diverse as Sri of Buddhism, defining the historical Buddha some kind of European conspiracy. the historical Buddha, but more were engaged (just like Woody Guthrie or Thomas Jefferson) pre-modern examples of religious leaders selecting definitive teaching of the Buddha, and then the founding of Nichiren Buddhism in Japan discussing here is distinctive to the last post-colonialism, new availability of texts and many other factors). that the Asian voices in the modernization influence; the two examples shown in the photographs zeal, even if they worked with Europeans, were not passive observers of social change in making those changes. his repeated rediscovery) was used to support feminist, then somehow this would be construed the more-ancient "historical Buddha" would caste system in Sri Lanka, or if Buddhism edifice of what the religion was actually turn our attention to what "the historical heart-strings a little bit: nobody is interested slavery, the subjugation of women, and the of the fabrication of a whole pseudo-history concerns. examples by insisting that they're not 100% claim that Woody Guthrie's version of Jesus poor isn't 100% wrong, either. is the construction of new myths out of old the new myth that I would say is really 100% ancient texts, and then pretend that we're was generally done with very little sincere the interpreters have had quite a lot of interest essay dealing with the other side of this small number of scholars were sincerely trying in their researches into Buddhist texts. you can take a look at my essay "Canon and English). a small number of people (frankly, people on the texts. in Buddhism influenced millions of people, should imagine the origins of Buddhism to these things were happening simultaneously: expectation that the most ancient form of "reconstructed" (in contrast to what was openly the religion as it could be observed in contemporaneous, and laypeople were engaged in projects to asserted to be ancient. before, whereby the historical Buddha is supposed inequality in Buddhism, and so on.) that this pattern could be applied to anything to its application. be represented as Buddhist, various competing Buddha, along with Socialism, Communism, and democracy and dictatorship, the influential that the Buddha's original teaching could of time, and then instead argued that the in another. Thailand was in helping the country catch Buddhism that was already well-established Buddhism", I've called it). to be an important part of modern debates the historical reality of Buddhism's origins. the religion's openly political aspirations back upon as if they were a debating club all of these countries had tremendous violence through technological and social transformations and so on). the general and profound problem that we can what is supernatural from mythology, but we of the 19th and 20th centuries. of Buddhism, presented as ancient, and that could be supported as fact. mean that it has influenced only people who majority of people who described themselves that there was an historical Jesus (if not historical facts, despite supernatural elements take the further step of ignoring the supernatural as historical evidence). pattern of thinking, even with people who talking about Buddhism or Chrisitianity as about the notion that the historical Buddha as claiming that Jesus never said anything ...yet many people "believe" it... Buddhism is especially influential for secular Jesus, simply because Buddhism is exotic, than anything the ancient texts say, partly ignore the evidence of the ancient texts. today (both as a religion and as an area of people to get into an ego-trip of imagining ignorant of, simply by repeating generalizations feel in these ideas is, frankly, much more I've spoken to hundreds of people who feel without having read so much as a pamphlet, about it, without any participation in Buddhism essay "The Opposite of Buddhism", and the authors in the history of Buddhism. tendency that became the dominant mode of he and his wife engaged in this same tendency sort of things "the real Buddha" would say, decide for oneself what is and what isn't (who also became an influential author on methodological assumption that our notions a skeptical reading of Hamlet cannot reveal example: we can't reveal "the real Plato" texts. here really means the imposition of modern of modern values, with a very biased reading those values. seem to be, frankly, crazy; does that mean crazy, to construct a more "rational" Plato? Buddha, has been made into a sort of flag-carrier in the modern imagination. the stuff of academic debates. when it's applied to meditation cults, psychological I say nothing more about it. personally, to a greater extent than a cult area of research here, that almost nobody how people part ways with their money, and, and identity, in getting involved with Buddhist in Buddhism were, often enough, formerly cult want to discuss their personal history —least just one positive conclusion (in these last This lens of apotheosis presumes a proto-religion to the evidence that we have now from the and theological aspects supposedly "added what is "added on", and what we're now subtracting the religion began with attitudes that were periods (although, of course, there's no evidence embellishment, exaggeration, superstition, of the religion's followers. be more skeptical (and less fanatical) than these religious leaders face-to-face knew knew that they didn't have supernatural powers. may be much more fanatical than later generations being founded in recent centuries (in recent themselves that living people have supernatural god incarnate, and so on. and history is, simply, the intention of the and people jump to the conclusion that you of psychologically detailed sense that can point here. author was writing for. the difference between a morality lecture for children. is not some kind of subtle, psychological genres, intended for very different audiences. this fundamental sense really is possible, the vast majority of these religious texts history at all. into the picture, stories about the Buddha just as dubious as the stories about the Buddha and so on. to connect their gods to particular kings, for authors to connect the Buddha to royal of these myths as historical evidence. record history at all, we cannot look at the monk spoke to an historical king than to say both are presented in the same genre, as very texts could be fables invented by authors moral and philosophical doctrines for future easier to know than the history of early Buddhism, that the authors of those ancient texts wanted debates were that differentiated early Buddhist we still have open debate about what century language he spoke, and so on. literature because, I think, it is essentially of Athens, he noted down all the religious to save their own lives, and in begging the of those methods worked. tragic events happen, and they're not made they're not a parable or a fable, and, to of real life, and Thucydides is enough of for no good reason, people turn to religion questions that have no good answers. on suffering, disease, death, and casts an to time, also. Buddhism would have produced many observations Thucydides. never produced even one author of this kind. has rather anti-historical attitudes, as a has never been to say, as Thucydides did, events matter in their own right (as facts religious notions were powerless against those based on karma, reincarnation, and a magical the ideal matters much more than anything legacy of blaming the victim, insisting that from someone's own past actions. and have remained as such even as attempts in politics, and legitimized their political Buddha" —or about whatever they supposed Buddhism to be. generation of reformers and modernizers; they answer, if Buddhism is going to continue to the tiny minority of people who are willing what our history is, now, as it unfolds, and values fables more than facts.