Mandylion
I perfectly understand what you mean. It's just that for me, the true Buddhists are those who follow the teachings of the Buddha, without addition destined to popularise it. The Mahayana sects are mostly the religious popular version I was talking about (except maybe the Zen branches and a few others). The best examples in Japan are the Jodo-shu and Jodo-shinshu who are the "McDonald of Buddhism". Just say the name of Amida and you're saved. Some kind of fast-food self-service.
You will have realised that I criticised above people who think they are Christians but don't believe in the most important philosophical issues of the Bible (the creation, origin of men, nature of God, etc.). That's the same as with the popularisation of Buddhism. They are changing the original doctrine, even radically so, but still want to be called like the true practicisoners. Saints were gradually added to Christianity, until the Reformation got rid of them for Protestants. But Christians Saints are the same kind of deviance as Buddhist gods. Neither Jesus nor Buddha would have acknowledged them.
It's difficult to have a mature discussion with ordinary people about such issues. I think there should be a clear distinction between what you call "historical" Buddhists (or Christians) and the contemporary mainstream, who believe in a perversed form of that religion. I am not saying that purists are better than others. Actually, I'm glad the average Christian has accepted the theory of evolution as well as most of what science has proved the Bible to be wrong. As for Mahayana Buddhist, it's probably a shame they have gone back into all the religiousness and superstiton that the Buddha rejected. Nevertheless, modern and rational people from Mahayana Buddhist background (China, Japan...) have given up all believes altogether. That is why most Japanese under 50 will say they are nor religious.
I'll add a new category to the poll : Mahayana Buddhism. If anybody wants to change their vote, just send me a PM.
I perfectly understand what you mean. It's just that for me, the true Buddhists are those who follow the teachings of the Buddha, without addition destined to popularise it. The Mahayana sects are mostly the religious popular version I was talking about (except maybe the Zen branches and a few others). The best examples in Japan are the Jodo-shu and Jodo-shinshu who are the "McDonald of Buddhism". Just say the name of Amida and you're saved. Some kind of fast-food self-service.
You will have realised that I criticised above people who think they are Christians but don't believe in the most important philosophical issues of the Bible (the creation, origin of men, nature of God, etc.). That's the same as with the popularisation of Buddhism. They are changing the original doctrine, even radically so, but still want to be called like the true practicisoners. Saints were gradually added to Christianity, until the Reformation got rid of them for Protestants. But Christians Saints are the same kind of deviance as Buddhist gods. Neither Jesus nor Buddha would have acknowledged them.
It's difficult to have a mature discussion with ordinary people about such issues. I think there should be a clear distinction between what you call "historical" Buddhists (or Christians) and the contemporary mainstream, who believe in a perversed form of that religion. I am not saying that purists are better than others. Actually, I'm glad the average Christian has accepted the theory of evolution as well as most of what science has proved the Bible to be wrong. As for Mahayana Buddhist, it's probably a shame they have gone back into all the religiousness and superstiton that the Buddha rejected. Nevertheless, modern and rational people from Mahayana Buddhist background (China, Japan...) have given up all believes altogether. That is why most Japanese under 50 will say they are nor religious.
I'll add a new category to the poll : Mahayana Buddhism. If anybody wants to change their vote, just send me a PM.