Buddhisme: Perbedaan antara revisi

Secara historis, akar Buddhisme terletak pada pemikiran religius dari [[India Zaman Besi|India kuno]] selama paruh kedua dari milenium pertama SEU.{{sfn|Gethin|2008|p=xv}} Pada masa tersebut merupakan sebuah periode pergolakan sosial dan keagamaan, dikarenakan ketidakpuasaan yang signifikan terhadap pengorbanan dan rital-ritual dari [[Agama Weda historis|Brahmanisme Weda]]{{refn|group=note|name=buddhismFound|Buddhism: The foundations of Buddhism, The cultural context. In ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]''. Retrieved 19-07-2009, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online Library Edition}} Tantangan muncul dari berbagai kelompok keagamaan [[asketisme|asketis]] dan filosofis baru yang memungkiri tradisi Brahamanis dan menolak otoritas [[Weda]] dan para [[Brahmana]].{{refn|group=note|name=ebhindu|Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Hinduism: History of Hinduism: The Vedic period (2nd millennium – 7th century BCE); Challenges to Brahmanism (6th – 2nd century BCE); Early Hinduism (2nd century BCE – 4th century CE). Retrieved 19-07-2009.}}{{sfn|Warder|2000|p=32}} Kelompok-kelompok ini, yang anggotanya dikenal sebagai [[sramana]], merupakan kelanjutan dari sebuah untaian pemikiraan India yang bersifat non-Weda, yang terpisah dari Brahmanisme [[Indo-Arya]].{{refn|group=note|name=Masih |According to Masih:{{sfn|Masih |2000|p=18}} "Alongside Hinduism was the non-Aryan Shramanic culture with its roots going back to prehistoric times."}} Para ahli memiliki alasan untuk percaya bahwa ide-ide seperti [[samsara]], karma (dalam hal pengaruh moralitas terhadap kelahiran kembali), dan [[moksha]], berasal dari sramana, dan kemudian diadopsi oleh agama ortodoks Brahmin.{{refn|group=note|name=Masih B|Masih:{{sfn|Masih |2000|p=37}} "This confirms that the doctrine of transmigration is non-aryan and was accepted by non-vedics like Ajivikism, Jainism and Buddhism. The Indo-aryans have borrowed the theory of re-birth after coming in contact with the aboriginal inhabitants of India. Certainly Jainism and non-vedics [..] accepted the doctrine of rebirth as supreme postulate or article of faith."}}{{refn|group=note|name=Karel Werner|Karel Werner:{{sfn|Werner|1989|p=34}} "Rahurkar speaks of them as belonging to two distinct 'cultural strands' ... Wayman also found evidence for two distinct approaches to the spiritual dimension in ancient India and calls them the traditions of 'truth and silence.' He traces them particularly in the older Upanishads, in early Buddhism, and in some later literature."}}{{refn|group=note|name=Flood|Flood:{{sfn|Flood|1996|p=86}} "The origin and doctrine of Karma and Samsara are obscure. These concepts were certainly circulating amongst sramanas, and Jainism and Buddhism developed specific and sophisticated ideas about the process of transmigration. It is very possible that the karmas and reincarnation entered the mainstream brahaminical thought from the sramana or the renouncer traditions."}}{{refn|group=note|name=Jaini |Padmanabh S. Jaini states:{{sfn|Jaini |2001 |p=51}} "Yajnavalkya's reluctance and manner in expounding the doctrine of karma in the assembly of Janaka (a reluctance not shown on any other occasion) can perhaps be explained by the assumption that it was, like that of the transmigration of soul, of non-brahmanical origin. In view of the fact that this doctrine is emblazoned on almost every page of sramana scriptures, it is highly probable that it was derived from them."}}{{refn|group=note|name=Pande|Govind Chandra Pande:{{sfn|Pande|1994 |p=135}} "Early Upanishad thinkers like Yajnavalkya were acquainted with the sramanic thinking and tried to incorporate these ideals of Karma, Samsara and Moksa into the vedic thought implying a disparagement of the vedic ritualism and recognising the mendicancy as an ideal."}}{{refn|group=note|name=Upadhyaya|Kashi Nath Upadhyaya: "The sudden appearance of this theory [of karma] in a full-fledged form is likely due, as already pointed out, to an impact of the wandering muni-and-[[shramana]]-cult, coming down from the pre-Vedic non-Aryan time."{{sfn|Upadhyaya|1998|p=76}}}}

 

 

Pada saat yang sama, gerakan-gerakan ini dipengaruhi dan dalam beberapa hal melanjutkan pemikiran filosofis dalam tradisi Weda, sebagaimana terefleksi misalnya di dalam [[Upanishad]].{{sfn|Warder|2000|p=30–32}} Gerakan-gerakan ini termasuk, selain Buddhisme, berbagai [[skeptis]] (seperti [[Sanjaya Belatthiputta]]), [[Atomisme|atomis]] (seperti [[Pakudha Kaccayana]]), [[materialis]] (seperti [[Ajita Kesakambali]]), [[Antinomianisme|antinomian]] (seperti [[Purana Kassapa]]); aliran-aliran terpenting pada abad ke-5 SEU adalah [[Ajivikas]], yang menekankan aturan nasib, [[Lokayata]] ([[materialis]]), [[Jnana|Ajnanas]] ([[Agnostisisme|agnostik]]) dan [[Jainisme|Jaina]], yang menekankan bahwa jiwa harus dibebaskan dari materi.{{sfn|Warder|2000|p=39}} Banyak gerakan-gerakan baru ini berbagi kosakata konseptual yang sama seperti [[Ātman (Buddhisme)|atman]] ("diri"), [[buddha]] ("yang sadar"), [[dhamma]] ("aturan" atau "hukum"), [[karma]] ("aksi/perbuatan"), [[Nirvana (konsep)|nirvana]] ("padamnya nafsu"), [[samsara]] ("lingkaran penderitaan"), dan [[yoga]] ("praktik spiritual").{{refn|group=note|name=ebbuddh|Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Buddhism: The foundations of Buddhism, the cultural context. Retrieved 19-07-2009.}} Para sramana menolak Weda, dan otoritas brahmana, yang mengklaim mereka memiliki kebenaran terungkap yang tidak bisa diketahui dengan cara manusia biasa mana pun. Selain itu, mereka menyatakan bahwa seluruh sistem Brahmanikal adalah penipuan : sebuah konspirasi para brahmana untuk memperkaya diri mereka sendiri dengan membebankan biaya terlalu tinggi untuk melakukan ritual palsu dan memberikan nasihat tak berguna.{{sfn|Warder|2000|p=33}}