1

Buddhist scriptures describe numerous supranormal phenomena such as the existence of devas (gods), multiple cosmological realms such as heaven and hell, and the continuity of consciousness or reincarnation that are inaccessible to ordinary sensory perception and cannot be established through conventional inference.

This raises a question about the nature of scriptural authority across Buddhist traditions. Do schools such as Theravāda, Mahāyāna, or Vajrayāna treat scripture or scriptural revelations as independent, authoritative proof of such phenomena, in a manner analogous to how śruti functions in Hindu Vedānta, where the text itself serves as an epistemic source? Or are these teachings primarily seen only as guiding principles for ethical conduct, meditative practice, and direct experiential verification, rather than as conclusive evidence of supranormal realities?

References to classical texts, commentaries, or doctrinal discussions that clarify whether the status of scriptural proof in Buddhism is regarded as epistemically authoritative for realities beyond perception and inference would be especially illuminating.

Improve this question
4
  • 1
    I'm not going to give an answer here, but I will point out that 'Buddhism' is an umbrella term that covers a large diversity of practices and beliefs. Gautama Buddha (as presented in the original source texts) seemed largely agnostic about 'supranormal' stuff, neither affirming nor denying it, and merely cautioning people not to become too attached to mental constructs about it. I doubt you'll find a singular authority on this who isn't contested by other singular authorities. And I suspect most 'advanced' buddhist practitioners would shrug off the whole question. Commented Oct 11 at 17:49
  • @TedWrigley But it should definitely be possible to give a perspective of it from every school? Commented Oct 12 at 2:26
  • or at least from some of them if not every Commented Oct 12 at 2:34
  • Well, probably, but it would take a master's thesis to do it right, and I suspect it would create more heat than light. Plus, I don't think 'scriptural authority' has the same impact in Buddhism that it does in some other faiths. Buddhism is dharma-centric, and most scripture is geared towards teaching or exemplifying the dharma. The various cosmologies and mythologies have their pedagogical place in that, sure, but no one would feel that the dharma itself would be threatened if those cosmologies and mythologies were debunked or dismissed. Commented Oct 12 at 3:19

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
0

There are numerous different Buddhist scriptures.

The older Pali Suttas do not necessarily describe numerous supranormal phenomena. Generally, it is the reader interpreting various narratives as "supranormal". For example:

  • The term "devas (gods)" is often used in very mundane ways simply describing people (e.g. Iti 106; AN 4.53; AN 4.190; even symbolically MN 37).

  • Heaven and hell are at times described as literal states of mind (e.g. SN 35.135). The words 'heaven' & 'hell' themselves are merely translations of words, literally meaning 'a happy place' & 'no good fortune' [nir + √i + *a].

  • The Buddha himself never ever taught about the continuity of consciousness (e.g. MN 38; SN 22.53; MN 148). Only Mara believed in continuity of consciousness (e.g. SN 4.23, SN 22.87).

  • There are a small handful of Pali suttas depicting literal reincarnation (e.g. AN 3.15, MN 81; MN 123; MN 143] however an examination of the language in most of these suttas (which share phrases with later works) show the Buddha obviously did not speak these suttas; plus these sutta contradict the core Dhamma principle found in SN 22.79, which defines the meaning of suttas containing the false translation of "recollected his past lives".

Improve this answer
0

The Buddha criticized those who put their faith in scripture calling them the blind led by the blind. He proved that generations of people believing in scripture cannot prove the contents of the scripture. This answer provides more details.

He also debunked oral transmission of scripture in MN 95. It is no use blindly transmitting scripture for which the truth is unverifiable.

Suppose there was a queue of blind men, each holding the one in front: the first one does not see, the middle one does not see, and the last one does not see. In the same way, it seems to me that the brahmins’ statement turns out to be comparable to a queue of blind men: the first one does not see, the middle one does not see, and the last one does not see. Their statement turns out to be a joke — mere words, void and hollow.
DN 13

He recommended to verify teachings using experience:

"So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" — then you should abandon them.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them.
Kalama Sutta (AN 3.65)

It's worth mentioning that there are concepts of faith follower and Dhamma (the teachings) follower.

A faith follower is not a blind faith follower and faith is not the end in its self. Faith in the Buddha drives a faith follower to move forward, but eventually, he needs to verify through experience too.

A Dhamma follower follows the teachings after having reflected on it. He too needs to verify through experience.

“What kind of person is a Dhamma-follower? Here some person does not contact with the body and abide in those liberations that are peaceful and immaterial, transcending forms, and his taints are not yet destroyed by his seeing with wisdom, but those teachings proclaimed by the Tathāgata are accepted by him after reflecting on them sufficiently with wisdom. Furthermore, he has these qualities: the faith faculty, the energy faculty, the mindfulness faculty, the concentration faculty, and the wisdom faculty. This kind of person is called a Dhamma-follower. I say of such a bhikkhu that he still has work to do with diligence. Why is that? Because when that venerable one…into homelessness. Seeing this fruit of diligence for such a bhikkhu, I say that he still has work to do with diligence.

“What kind of person is a faith-follower? Here some person does not contact with the body and abide in those liberations that are peaceful and immaterial, transcending forms, and his taints are not yet destroyed by his seeing with wisdom, yet he has sufficient faith in and love for the Tathāgata. Furthermore, he has these qualities: the faith faculty, the energy faculty, the mindfulness faculty, the concentration faculty, and the wisdom faculty. This kind of person is called a faith-follower. I say of such a bhikkhu that he still has work to do with diligence. Why is that? Because when that venerable one makes use of suitable resting places and associates with good friends and nurtures his spiritual faculties, he may by realising for himself with direct knowledge here and now enter upon and abide in that supreme goal of the holy life for the sake of which clansmen rightly go forth from the home life into homelessness. Seeing this fruit of diligence for such a bhikkhu, I say that he still has work to do with diligence.
MN 70

What about heaven, hell, gods, demons, rebirth etc? How do you verify those through experience? Do you need scripture or a teacher for those?

Well, read about rebirth and karma in this answer.

You will find that some of these unproveable elements serve as skillful means to solve mindset problems in the interim, while leading towards permanent liberation. It has a soteriological purpose.

Ultimately, the goal of the Buddha is permanent liberation from suffering (mental discontent).

Whether there is a real heaven or hell or gods or demons, or whether there are multiverses, or whether the universe is a hologram or whether subatomic particles are composed of superstrings, are all not important to the ultimate goal of Buddhism.

"Conjecture about [the origin, etc., of] the world is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it.
AN 4.77

The parable of the poisoned arrow tells us that we don't need to know all the details of the poisoned arrow and its origin. This means metaphysical and ontological speculations are pointless. What's important is to remove the poisoned arrow as soon as possible. This means soteriological purpose and usefulness is all that is important.

"It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him.
MN 63

The Buddha's focus was empirical and soteriological, not ontological or metaphysical. The Buddha was only interested in what would end suffering (mental discontent) permanently.

In the past, as today, what I describe is suffering and the cessation of suffering.
SN 22.86

Improve this answer
2
  • But even buddha-vacana comes in form of scripture only does it not? Commented Oct 12 at 11:04
  • @Culturalcicada Scripture has to be verified through experience Commented Oct 12 at 11:32

You must log in to answer this question.