"Ron, does not this imply that the ideas and practices of Buddhism as preserved in scriptures are not sufficient, for following the Noble Path?"
There is no such implication..... The confusing of a personal path with a professional path is occuring. A school of Buddhism must contain a transmission of lienage or teaching authority traceable back to the Buddha himself. All schools do that. Schools do not follow the noble path....they are schools. People are following the noble path not schools of Buddhism. Individuals to be recognized as Buddhists have no restrictions from which can be made the assertation they are or are not Buddhist. It is personal,the simple claim..I am Buddhist is the qualifier personally.
Whatever school you may choose to follow, Bernie Glassman Amercianized types, Shambala Tibetan/ Americanized types they are going to have a established chain of teachers/teachings that trace back to the Buddha.
YOu personally may just follow the Buddhas word and there is nothing wrong with that. YOu may not even follow any schools interpretation, and that is fine as well. You may even write books about these things and that's a OK. But if you are teaching others and identifying yourself as a Buddhist religious teacher(not a academic) you must affiliate with some school who gives you authority to do so. The school must find you meeting their standards whatever they may be, to do so. If you are teaching in a religious context Buddhism, just because you know a whole lot, like perhaps one may start their own Christian school of faith because they simply love jesus, you are not teaching within what others will consider to be a recognized school of Buddhism.
ONce you have authority to teach/lead....certainly you may go where you may within Buddhism as long as the school does not reclaim your authority in some manner.
If you are suchly teaching Buddhism in a religious context and have no verifiable lineage/ leadership role/ or considered ability to transmit teachings within some school of Buddhism.....globally generally you will not be considered any sort of teacher but full of crap. Generally speaking.
So that is how Buddhists seem to qualify such things. The culture Buddhism finds itself in has many variances to include the Western culture at present. All schools coming to America if you check you will find they, even the most strangely looking ones, have this thing....transmission of some form or manner. Check it out yourself.
And be fully advised there do exist schools of Buddhism currently that are self invented ones(even one of the internet variety). Other schools and globally generally peoples, do not recognize them. Generally speaking they are not considered schools of Buddhism and as such they are commonly banned from discussion boards and such. I don't suppose that would ever happen in a Christian theist context, as basically anyone may establish a home grown form of Christianity, and call its name whatever they want.
The concensus Buddhists have always used for this determination is transmission/ lineage/teaching authority, whatever you may want to call it, the authorization to teach/lead from a established school. Once that is granted/established, then one could start their own school if they so desired and had the means and followers. This allows for variance but keeps the core generally intact.
Last edited by ronnewmexico
on Mon Feb 01, 2010 8:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
"This order considers that progress can be achieved more rapidly during a single month of self-transformation through terrifying conditions in rough terrain and in "the abode of harmful forces" than through meditating for a period of three years in towns and monasteries"....Takpo Tashi Namgyal.