Paññāsikhara wrote:
I disagree that the Buddha would be "displeased" or "disappointed" at all. Seems rather that he would take it all with equanimity, neither rolling his eyes, nor otherwise. He sees the capabilities of people, and expects nothing in the end.
...
But, and this is the ironic thing I feel, the idea of the Buddha being "displeased" sounds more like something from the Old Testament, a wrathful and jealous God! Is there much difference between looking at the Buddha as a savior God than looking at him as a displeased God? Or is this all just about Protestant Buddhism after all?
Greetings, Pannasikhara,
My thoughts, projected onto the Buddha, were nothing to do with a God - wrathful, jealous, old-testamentary, protestant or other - just the disappointment of a teacher whose students have *still* not understood him properly after all those years of teaching.
Paññāsikhara wrote:
And I also think that he would not have much of a problem with people making images or the like. After all, at the time of his parinibbana, he was content to have the lay people make stupas to enshrine his relics, while the renunciants continued their inner practice. Those lay people would thus sow positive seeds, and have further opportunity to learn and practice the Dhamma in the future. Nothing to roll one's eyes over.
The bit I have made bold was new to me and does go some way to making me more comfortable with the idea of the statue and the practice of veneration/adoration. However, I know (or think I know - I could be wrong in this as well
) that statues of the Buddha were not made until many years after his passing, and believed that that was because he asked them not to make images of him.
My (sporadic, disorganised) readings of the suttas haven't included much at all about devotional practices for the laity - dana towards the sangha, yes, but not veneration of the Buddha. Have you got time to clarify the early development of lay practice for us?
Kim