What Buddhist tradition may be viewed as most "pure" in that it is most devoid of cultural overlay?

Question

For example, Tibetan Buddhist practice includes a host of practices and beliefs which stem from the embracing of Buddhism by an existing Tibetan culture, said Tibetan aspects being additional to the fundamental essence of Buddhism. Is there a tradtion of Buddhism which manifests almost entirely as a simple practice of the fundamental teaching of Shakyamuni Buddha without incorporating a bunch of extraneous incidental cultural overlay?

Answer 1

Thats a tough one. It is very important to understand that all teachings of Buddhism are taught while being mindful of the audience and their biases, likes and dislikes (in a cultural and, depending on the interaction, personal sense). This is so the the recipient of the teachings can internalize it and compare it to what they know as efficiently as possible. This makes for a clearer understanding of complex topics. With this in mind, it would be difficult to find a "Pure" aspect of Buddhism. There are adaptations that have been made to help it be more general or to a Western mindset. For example there is Neuro-linguistic Programming (NLP) which has obvious roots in Buddhism, though ultimate conclusions about reality are not discussed. There are also cultural adaptations such as the New Kadampa Buddhists which, while still retaining some attachment to Tibeten ideas such as gods and demons that incarnate some aspect of compassion. I think, though, that you may enjoy Zen Buddhism as it seems more reflective of Taoist ideas and Indian teachers. Zen Buddhism is perhaps, at least, a little closer to the original physical location of Buddhisms origins. Maybe check out NLP too.

Answer 2

We have none of the Buddha's teachings recorded for at least 300-500 years after he spoke them; thus, any attempt to distill the 'pure' teachings from cultural trappings is doomed from the beginning. The quest for the discovery of 'pure' or 'original' buddhism has come under a great deal of fire in Buddhist Studies in the last 25 years, and rightly so.

Zen, btw, is quite colored by its translation through chinese and into japanese--the very translation of the texts influenced their meaning. We might also point out that marriage is a wholly Japanese innovation for monks.

What elements are incidental, or extraneous? Did the Buddha not, according to everyone's textual traditions, conquer demons? Or perform miracles? Even the notion that Mahayana and tantra are 'later' 'degenerate 'corrupt' practices is pretty unsustainable. It turns out that the earliest texts we have are in fact Mahayana--so much for any evidence for the precedence of non-Mahayana (Theravada, Mahasangika, Sammiya, what-have-you) Buddhism.

A straight answer to your question, without my admittedly obfuscationalist academicist approach, might be that the texts of the Tibetan canon (the bka' gyur and bstan 'gyur) are very faithful to their Sanskrit sources--usually more reliably so than any others. Their inclusion in the canon is, in some places, a bit arbitrary, but they are faithful to the Indian originals. But even their we're 1200 years past the historical buddha's time.

Answer 3

Traditions aren't what Buddhism is about. Here's the core thinking that makes you Buddhist or not:

One must accept:

1. all things are impermanent and nothing, even concepts are permanent

2. all emotions bring pain and suffering, no emotion is "purely pleasurable"

3. all phenomena are illusory and empty

4. enlightenment is beyond concepts

Everything else is just GRAVY. Tibetan Buddhism incorporates these things with their own special "flavor".

_()_

Answer 4

As soon as you introduce "tradition," you have cultural baggage.

I try to understand Buddhism at its heart (as so well-mentioned there above), but I would still need a way to relate it to my particular culture.

Answer 5

Choose reason over faith, forget all beliefs, and you'll live a rational, productive, and happy life!