Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

The "ISM" of Buddhism?

howhow Veteran Veteran
edited August 2012 in Buddhism Today
Is it just me or are other people running into more & more folks with a long time Buddhist practises who no longer identify themselves as Buddhist?

They meditate, read sutra's and even perform Buddhist ceremony and yet say to me they are no longer think of themselves as Buddhist.
I doubt that the Buddha would have cared about holding on to such an identity so who but the Buddhist schools profit from such an identification?

When I do call myself a Buddhist, it doesn't feel so much of an identity as just the easiest way to explain how I practise.
zsc

Comments

  • SabreSabre Veteran
    edited August 2012
    Once there was a layman who came to Ajahn Chah and asked him who Ajahn Chah was. Ajahn Chah, seeing that the spiritual development of the individual was not very advanced, pointed to himself and said, "This, this is Ajahn Chah."

    On another occasion, Ajahn Chah was asked the same question by someone else. This time, however, seeing that the questioner's capacity to understand the Dhamma was higher, Ajahn Chah answered by saying, "Ajahn Chah? There is NO Ajahn Chah."
    ;)

    Similarly, I use the label 'Buddhist' or not.
  • RebeccaSRebeccaS Veteran
    edited August 2012
    I think it's the same as the whole "not religious but spiritual" thing you hear a lot of these days. Lots of people prefer to pay attention to the teachings that various religions have in common - kindness, compassion etc. rather than tie themselves to one specific religion.
    So maybe they're reading suttas, but then they might go read the Bible or The Power of Now or something. If they've been practicing a while, maybe they're just spreading their wings a little, exploring.
    zsc
  • how said:

    Is it just me or are other people running into more & more folks with a long time Buddhist practises who no longer identify themselves as Buddhist?

    They meditate, read sutra's and even perform Buddhist ceremony and yet say to me they are no longer think of themselves as Buddhist.
    I doubt that the Buddha would have cared about holding on to such an identity so who but the Buddhist schools profit from such an identification?

    When I do call myself a Buddhist, it doesn't feel so much of an identity as just the easiest way to explain how I practise.

    I think that is kind of ignorant that one would be a practicing Buddhist and no longer think of themself as such.

    Buddhist means in a sense, inner being. One who focuses more on working with the internal rather than the external.

    I have come across people who feel the need to speak words that say how that what they are doing is not based in ego and in fact upon interacting with a couple of them they seemed to be on nothing but an ego trip.

    As if saying that one is not acting out of ignorance prevents it from happening altogether.

    That is what I first thought of reading your post.. it sounds like a clever game created by ego.

    Going to the trouble of speaking that one is no longer identifying as such puts up its own obstacle.

    It is like when somebody tells you that they are a nice person.

    Or that it is the "principle" not the money.

    If they were nice they wouldn't say it, their actions would speak it loud and clear
    same with the principle and money thing. If somebody is for truly helping out others in whatever kind of business they run, that will speak for them.
    zsc
  • howhow Veteran Veteran
    edited August 2012
    @OneLifeForm
    Interesting observations!
    I usually think folks are just what they do but I also think that a Buddhist practise might just be marked by the self assigned labels left behind in one's wake.
    Myself I'd be cautious of labelling a Buddhist practise as being more internal than external because my practise seems to delight in showing how elusively transitory, inside and outside really is..

  • CloudCloud Veteran
    I'm with @TheBeejAbides completely! It feels like putting on another hat, another unnecessary identity. If you're practicing the Way, you're practicing the Way... don't "be" a Buddhist, don't be a meditator, don't be anything in particular. Just "do".

    Of course it's completely acceptable to think of yourself as a Buddhist and to call yourself a Buddhist, just don't get too caught up in it. The Buddha wasn't a Buddhist, he was just a seeker of truth and peace (or at least these are what he found).
    I_AM_THATzsc
  • I call myself a Buddhist.

    Just because I do such does not mean I identify with it.

    People get that twisted all the time.. they think the speaking of something means that the individual is really "identifying" with it.

    My name is Sean.

    Does that mean I think I exist independently from my own side?

    Nope.

    Identification is an internal process.

    Being concerned about whether or not one is using labels is unnecessary.

    Using words to define things as they are conventionally make things a whole lot easier.

    It is the identification that is or is not the problem and that is up to the individual to deal with as they please.

    zsc
  • BeejBeej Human Being Veteran
    edited August 2012
    Yes... Buddhism is a great tool, it's like a how-to manual for the seeker, but it's not totally necessary for spiritual proggression. Many people throughout history have had incredible insight without calling themselves Buddhist, or without even really 'knowing' any Buddhist teachings. As I said in another thread, The Truth is The Truth, and anybody who touches it arrives at it despite their claimed identies, not because of it. Re: Michel de Montaigne, Issaac Newton, Gandi, Bob Marley... just to name a few. I can't say if these guys were enlightened, but I bet a Buddha would love to have a conversation with them. In fact, I came to Buddism as a way to talk about insight that I gathered in relative ignorance to the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold path, instead of the other way around.

    So much for Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc...
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    how said:

    Is it just me or are other people running into more & more folks with a long time Buddhist practises who no longer identify themselves as Buddhist?

    They meditate, read sutra's and even perform Buddhist ceremony and yet say to me they are no longer think of themselves as Buddhist.
    I doubt that the Buddha would have cared about holding on to such an identity so who but the Buddhist schools profit from such an identification?

    When I do call myself a Buddhist, it doesn't feel so much of an identity as just the easiest way to explain how I practise.

    Is it part of the western move toward "universalism"?

    zsc
  • It is the identification that is or is not the problem and that is up to the individual to deal with as they please.
    Well, not really. The processes involved are not rational or entirely volitional. Identities tend to solidify when the rubber hits the road.
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    how said:

    Is it just me or are other people running into more & more folks with a long time Buddhist practises who no longer identify themselves as Buddhist?

    So there are people saying "I've been doing Buddhist practice for a long time, but I'm not a Buddhist"?
    I don't get it. :rolleyes:
    son_of_dhammazsc
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    Is it part of the western move toward "universalism"?
    Is it universalism or just confusion? ;)
    son_of_dhammazsc
  • Is it part of the western move toward "universalism"?
    Is it universalism or just confusion? ;)

    Universal confusion.

    zsc
  • VastmindVastmind Memphis, TN Veteran
    edited August 2012
    @how said " When I do call myself a Buddhist, it doesn't feel so much of an identity as just the easiest way to explain how I practise. "

    I'll take that, 2 bucks, and a cup of coffee. :)

    Is'nt how/why you practice a part of your identity?
    If the goal is to let go of everything, Buddhism included,
    then why be on the Path? If the goal is to practice just
    for the practice alone, then why practice? I thought we all
    were trying to be Buddha's/Enlightened/Nirvana, etc.?

    @PedanticPorpoise said " So there are people saying
    "I've been doing Buddhist practice for a long time, but I'm not a Buddhist"?
    I don't get it.

    I agree with Porpoise here.
    Who you been hanging out with? lolololol
  • I_AM_THATI_AM_THAT Veteran
    edited August 2012
    My take on the original post is that when a person is a sincere seeker of truth and freedom they may no longer associate their path to a given label (Buddhism). I have talked to a number of guru's that do not associate their current path to any one label. However each one has stated that they started out as Buddhists.

    Is there any documentation to the fact that the Buddha taught Buddhism? Or was this a label given to his teachings once he passed on? Did Jesus teach Christianity, or was this a label given to his teachings?

    Interesting questions?

    Ten years ago if asked I would have labeled myself as a Christian. Today I am a Buddhist. Tomorrow I might be free of all labels...
    zsc
  • VastmindVastmind Memphis, TN Veteran
    edited August 2012
    I_AM_THAT said:

    My take on the original post is that when a person is a sincere seeker of truth and freedom they may no longer associate their path to a given label (Buddhism). I have talked to a number of guru's that do not associate their current path to any one label. However each one has stated that they started out as Buddhists.

    Is there any documentation to the fact that the Buddha taught Buddhism? Or was this a label given to his teachings once he passed on? Did Jesus teach Christianity, or was this a label given to his teachings?

    Interesting questions?

    interesting......*twisting mustache on one side* haha

    In your view, what would Buddha talk about with someone
    who has left Buddhism?
  • SileSile Veteran
    The label is for others' sake, too, a way to simply communicate a basic concept or set of concepts. I myself may feel beyond all labels, philosophically, but "Buddhist" still best describes my set of philosophies.
    I_AM_THAT
  • Vastminds said:

    I_AM_THAT said:

    My take on the original post is that when a person is a sincere seeker of truth and freedom they may no longer associate their path to a given label (Buddhism). I have talked to a number of guru's that do not associate their current path to any one label. However each one has stated that they started out as Buddhists.

    Is there any documentation to the fact that the Buddha taught Buddhism? Or was this a label given to his teachings once he passed on? Did Jesus teach Christianity, or was this a label given to his teachings?

    Interesting questions?

    interesting......*twisting mustache on one side* haha

    In your view, what would Buddha talk about with someone
    who has left Buddhism?
    Not sure I said anyone left Buddhism, I said they no longer label it as Buddhism.

    In my opinion since I do not know what the Buddha would be thinking as he talked to his followers; I would think he would talk about what ever needed to be said at that moment in time that would assist anyone listening to find the truth they were seeking.
    how
  • VastmindVastmind Memphis, TN Veteran
    edited August 2012
    I_AM_THAT said " Not sure I said anyone left Buddhism, I said they no longer label it as Buddhism."

    Fair enough. The label aspect was brought into the discussion, thats just
    maybe where I get confused.
    I need labels to discuss things. :)
  • VastmindVastmind Memphis, TN Veteran
    edited August 2012
    In my experience as an interpreter for the deaf, ASL,
    Even when you take the grunt/noise/sound out of words,
    you still have to convey a message, a concept, if you will.
    Take as much view out as u want, but we have to communicate.
    Imagine Helen Keller....She couldnt see either. So sign language
    of labels had to be conveyed to her in the palm of her hand.
    Think about that. Wow, right?

    Dont everybody be ready to lose all your labels, words, messages
    in everything.
    zsc
Sign In or Register to comment.