Guerrilla Dhafare

mindatrisk

Spreading the Dharma... Guerrilla style!

For a while now i've been starting Dharma topic threads on a few different discussion forums attempting to spread the Dharma into areas where the audience might be traditionally skeptical / reluctant. For example, I do quite a bit of posting at the UK Business Forums.

I've always had a strong desire to reach out to those who are skeptical / reluctant and try to find ways to share Dharma wisdom that is acceptable and accessible to them. Generally this means removing any overtly spiritual language as well as any metaphysical or esoteric concepts. Essentially, sharing the essence of the Dharma in ways that are practical, grounded in this reality, and relevant to their lives. I call this Guerrilla Dhafare!

From this I had the idea to start a Facebook page dedicated to Guerrilla Dhafare, a space where we can share our campaign ideas, receive support and inspiration, share tactics, strategies and lessons, and, above all, support and encourage each other. Here is the page, all fresh and new!

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Guerrilla-Dhafare/496135443816716#

If you are interested in engaging in some guerrilla Dhafare then please LIKE the page and get involved! There are so many unconventional, creative and skilful ways that we can spread the Dharma. Online forums are one great way to get to specific (and large) audiences.

And here is a link to my latest discussion at the UK Business Forums 'Why You Should Not Get Angry'...

http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=309934

Thank you, and peace be with you all.

vinlyn

In my view, you are treading a razor-thin line here.

I read your discussion of why one shouldn't get angry, and it was fine. But you are very close -- at least in concept -- to proselytizing.

And here are some of the problems with proselytizing:

1. Most people find it offensive to have another person tell them, "Your religion is less than my religion, so I'm going to force my better religion on you."

2. It's sort of like the old Ken-L-Ration commercials -- "My religion's better than your religion, mine is better than yours. I am better cause I follow the true religion. My religion's better than yours." Followed by the childish statement, "Na na na na na na."

3. People should have freedom of thought, and that means freedom to choose their thinking topics and patterns.

4. I was taught from the beginning, by Thai monks, that in Buddhism we don't go out "spreading the Dhamma", but that instead people come to us of their own volition.

Now, having said those things, you haven't crossed the line yet...but my guess is that you (like many others) will sooner or later move from basic concepts of human behavior and interaction to proselytizing for Buddhism.

mindatrisk

What a very intelligent response! I had not even for the briefest moment considered the perspective you have shared here... Thank you! My honest feeling is that it is highly unlikely that I would begin to proselytise, if only because I don't belong to any particular Buddhist tradition to proselytise, but also because this whole project idea is based upon not sharing a religious angle but simply the essence of Dharma... in fact, it is something that I am very passionate about and dedicated too. So, such discussions - at least for me - would never descend into anything like that because, quite simply, that is one of the main reasons for starting Guerrilla Dhafare! Thank you, though, for your thoughts.

vinlyn

If you can stick to this principle -- "this whole project idea is based upon not sharing a religious angle but simply the essence of Dharma" -- then I think you are doing good for people.

mindatrisk

Thank you, and I will, because it's what I truly believe is the way forwards, and it's what will allow us to break into new ground with new audiences. We can help so many people by just simply helping them! Everything else is redundant until they themselves decide otherwise. I'm glad we are on the same page with this. I LOVE the Dharma, I love how it flows through me, and to me Buddhism is a manifestation of the Dharma and a vehicle for it, but it is not the Dharma, the two are separate, and the Dharma can be shared and utilised without one single word being uttered relating to Buddhism. And I love that!

lobster

mindatrisk said:

Dharma can be shared and utilised without one single word being uttered relating to Buddhism. And I love that!

Sometimes it can be shared without a single word of any description. Have you been on the 'dharma intoxicants' abstention program? Being drug free is quite an undertaking. :coffee:
As a door to door salesman of Nothing, I have some listening to undertake . . . :orange:

mindatrisk

lobster said:

mindatrisk said:

Dharma can be shared and utilised without one single word being uttered relating to Buddhism. And I love that!

Sometimes it can be shared without a single word of any description. Have you been on the 'dharma intoxicants' abstention program? Being drug free is quite an undertaking. :coffee:
As a door to door salesman of Nothing, I have some listening to undertake . . . :orange:

Not sure i'm following!

lobster

My humble apologies.

When we become drunk on dharma, everyone becomes our friend and we decide the world is happier and friendlier when everyone is loved up with metta. Do we have the clarity to know who needs objective sobriety, life experiences and who needs more of the 'joys of dharma'?
Everyone needs Jesus as I am sure you will agree? No?
No . . . no need for Jesus my end either . . .

When we have Nothing to buy or sell, we start to listen to what is required. You know? Perhaps in your judgement. I hope so.

If we look a little deeper, perhaps other motivations exist . . . does that make more sense?

Save yourself. The world will wait.

:wave:

mindatrisk

Are you suggesting that I don't try to help people?

lobster

mindatrisk said:

Are you suggesting that I don't try to help people?

I am suggesting you are the first person to help. What are you suggesting?

mindatrisk

I'm suggesting that the two go hand in hand! That what I give to another I also give to myself, after all, are we not all one? Anyway, i've spent the last 13 years working on myself, and whilst I certainly have much more work to do, I am certainly able to help others to some degree. The world needs humans helping each other as best as they can. I am able to, and so I do, and in doing so, I help myself.

lobster

Sounds like a plan. :clap:
Apart from farceBook and business twitter, which are quite close to some peoples hell realms, is there an easier place to start? I was thinking of starting here. Maybe I am just not cut out for Gorilla Dharma . . .

mindatrisk

I'm not sure that I need to share the Dharma in unconventional ways here! The idea is to share Dharma essence with new audiences in ways that they find accessible and relevant to their lives. The Facebook page is the base for any Guerrilla Dharma Warriors, and, for now, the sort of places i'm looking to take the Dharma too are other discussion forums - like this one - but for other subjects, like business, or satanists, or Christians, or car sales men, or whoever.

I am sure you are cut out for Guerrilla Dharma. All you'd be doing is sharing the wisdom and ideas that you are already familiar with and, I presume, passionate about with new audiences in a way that is appropriate and helpful for them, which simply requires flexibility and skill. Have you read my posts at the UK Business Forum? It's nothing complex or difficult, but it is helpful, and at least one person seems to be interested.

Beej

@mindatrisk- i love your enthusiasm. i recall your efforts from last year, where you called it "dharma for the masses", which many of us argued against because it sounded too much like a marxist/buddhist mash-up. i like the idea of you simply "planting seeds" as time may help them grow. but a full-frontal dharmatic assault wont work, because people can only hear or accept certain things when and if they become ready to. so, continue to plant your seeds.... but know that they must water the plants themselves.

lobster

Have you read my posts at the UK Business Forum?

No.

Thankfully the UK Business community here do not try to sell me dharma paraphernalia or otherwise engage in clandestine business. Just the idea of it seems counter productive. Maybe I am not cut out for this 'dharma by stealth' . . . maybe I would be better suited to begging?

Are you planning on a franchise?
http://www.tricycle.com/reviews/the-price-of-faith-pico-iyer-emthe-buddha-from-brooklynem
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1865425

Maybe I should to try joining the Freemasons who offer the business community their soft cell? Not sure what to think about all this . . .

mindatrisk

lobster said:

Have you read my posts at the UK Business Forum?

No.

Thankfully the UK Business community here do not try to sell me dharma paraphernalia or otherwise engage in clandestine business. Just the idea of it seems counter productive. Maybe I am not cut out for this 'dharma by stealth' . . . maybe I would be better suited to begging?

Are you planning on a franchise?
http://www.tricycle.com/reviews/the-price-of-faith-pico-iyer-emthe-buddha-from-brooklynem
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1865425

Maybe I should to try joining the Freemasons who offer the business community their soft cell? Not sure what to think about all this . . .

I think that unless you are willing to look at exactly what it is i'm doing then there really is nothing for you to think about. Please click on the link, read my posts, read the responses, and I think you'll see that it is a very healthy discussion between grown adults about the nature of anger and it's positive and negative aspects. I think you are taking a very judgemental position on something that you are quite ignorant about at the moment. Please read the posts at UK Business Forums and then let me know what you think. I'd appreciate that and value your view much more. The posts are in their 'Time Out' sub-forum, i.e. a space where anyone can talk about anything.

mindatrisk

TheBeejAbides said:

@mindatrisk- i love your enthusiasm. i recall your efforts from last year, where you called it "dharma for the masses", which many of us argued against because it sounded too much like a marxist/buddhist mash-up. i like the idea of you simply "planting seeds" as time may help them grow. but a full-frontal dharmatic assault wont work, because people can only hear or accept certain things when and if they become ready to. so, continue to plant your seeds.... but know that they must water the plants themselves.

I will do, thank you. And I still plan a 'dharma for the masses', which can simply be translated as dharma, skilfully presented so as to be accessible and relevant to new and wider audiences. As I said previously - and as i've experienced - there are obstacles to people accessing Dharma through traditional paths, and if those obstacles were removed then I believe that many, many more people would engage with Dharma teachings and benefit greatly from them. This, to me, is a good thing!

lobster

I think that unless you are willing to look at exactly what it is i'm doing then there really is nothing for you to think about.

I'll take that option. Many thanks.

mindatrisk

lobster said:

I think that unless you are willing to look at exactly what it is i'm doing then there really is nothing for you to think about.

I'll take that option. Many thanks.

Is this, then, the state of modern Buddhism? I'm not getting at you, but i'm curious to your attitude within this thread, because it seems like you've been unnecessarily judgemental, wilfully ignorant and quite discouraging, and for no apparent reason. You are free to be as you wish, but I just don't understand.

lobster

I just don't understand

My dear friend,
If you understood, you would behave differently. What you are asking for I am unable to provide and that is understanding. So I will say what is there to understand?

Save yourself. Then the world.
The other way around leads only to . . . understanding . . . eventually . . .

As for me being 'unnecessarily judgemental, wilfully ignorant and quite discouraging' - no doubt . . . can you save me? Probably not I will have to to that myself . . .

mindatrisk

I am not trying to 'save the world'. I am trying to help. I already do. I work with recovering addicts. Do you think I should stop this until I have saved myself? Do you think every doctor should stop treating patients until they have saved themselves? Do you think every teacher should stop educating our young until they have saved themselves? Do you think every social worker should stop helping the vulnerable until they have saved themselves? I am just one more human being doing what I can to help others and to be of best service as possible. Why would I need to 'save myself' before beginning to help? If this were the criteria for helping others then we would all be dead.

vinlyn

@Lobster, in my humble view, during discussions it would help if you forgot about being clever and were more straight forward in making your points. Of course, you have the freedom to write any way you wish.

Months ago when @mindatrisk was on another mission, he seemed way too involved in proselytizing, something I will never endorse for any one in any religion. This time, his writings seem more neutral, in terms of pushing a religion.

mindatrisk

lobster said:

UK_NMA said:

is there any advice you can provide?

Many thanks!

Keep reading, keep meditating.
Good advice already given.

. . . however you want a regime?
How about this:
http://aromeditation.org/learn-buddhist-meditation.html

Or you could maybe go on a retreat/holiday?
How about an online zendo?
http://www.treeleaf.org/

We can not find the way for you . . . just point to possible directions . . .

and trying to watch my mind during the rest of the day

Excellent, you could become enlightened any decade now . . .

(From the thread 'Practice Advice). To make one simple point... Here you have offered help - good advice, sound guidance, true wisdom and understanding, and you have offered it, I presume, before 'saving yourself'. Why is this any different to what I have suggested? You are simply reaching out and sharing the understanding you have to another in need. No more and no less than I am encouraging more of us to do.

mindatrisk

vinlyn said:

@Lobster, in my humble view, during discussions it would help if you forgot about being clever and were more straight forward in making your points. Of course, you have the freedom to write any way you wish.

Months ago when @mindatrisk was on another mission, he seemed way too involved in proselytizing, something I will never endorse for any one in any religion. This time, his writings seem more neutral, in terms of pushing a religion.

No missions, just the one simple directive - to share the Dharma with as many people as possible. I also think that if you looked back upon my previous posts that you would be hard pressed to find me proselytising. For one main reason, I am not Buddhist, and I am openly influenced by any philosophy or idea that inspires love within me. I have no basis to proselytise anything.

My previous writings were encouraged a more streamlined approach to sharing the Dharma - an approach that focused on simply helping people on their terms, not ours. A skilful presentation of Dharma that was accessible and relevant to the lives of the vast majority of people who are not aware of the benefits of the Dharma. It was about being creative, being flexible and seeking to benefit others before protecting traditions. It is about helping as many people as possible - or at least providing as many people as possible with the chance to be helped by putting the Dharma in their line of vision.

It is one thing that some people have no interest in the Dharma, but what about all those are not even aware that it exists? What about all of those who have never even given one thought to the state of their mind? What about all of those who suffer day in and day out with no idea that their are solutions? Should we not at least provide them with the best chance possible of having access to help? This is all I suggest. I have no interest in pushing Buddhism, and never have done, I simply want to help people, and at the very least give them the chance of being helped.

vinlyn

I am reminded of the Catholic who tell people that their clinics are not made with the intention of converting anyone to Catholicism. Yet, all the Catholic "stuff" is there in every clinic. Even today, here in Colorado Springs, my preferred hospital is St. Francis. And there they are in every room -- crucifixes. Even in the room reserved for colonoscopies!

You are on a mission -- to share the Dhamma with as many people as possible (your words). But, BTW, where did you get that "directive" (again, your word) from. In the Theravadan Buddhism I was taught that is not our mission/directive. In fact, I was taught to never push it in any sense, but always provide it to those who come seeking it.

mindatrisk

vinlyn said:

I am reminded of the Catholic who tell people that their clinics are not made with the intention of converting anyone to Catholicism. Yet, all the Catholic "stuff" is there in every clinic. Even today, here in Colorado Springs, my preferred hospital is St. Francis. And there they are in every room -- crucifixes. Even in the room reserved for colonoscopies!

You are on a mission -- to share the Dhamma with as many people as possible (your words). But, BTW, where did you get that "directive" (again, your word) from. In the Theravadan Buddhism I was taught that is not our mission/directive. In fact, I was taught to never push it in any sense, but always provide it to those who come seeking it.

Think of it this way... If there were a million people dying of thirst, would you not seek to provide them with the option of water? Would you not go to them and say 'here is some water, this will help you'...? You could not make them drink the water, just as I cannot make anyone engage or practice the Dharma, but I can let them know it exists and I can make it available to them such that they have a choice. Is this unreasonable? Certainly, I accept the point that in presenting the option of Dharma requires great skill. Just as presenting thirsty people with a glass of polluted water in a dirty glass would be unhelpful, so to must I be wise in how I present the Dharma, but in terms of giving people the option to quench their thirst, I see no problem. What problem is it that you see?

vinlyn

mindatrisk said:

Think of it this way... If there were a million people dying of thirst, would you not seek to provide them with the option of water? Would you not go to them and say 'here is some water, this will help you'...? You could not make them drink the water, just as I cannot make anyone engage or practice the Dharma, but I can let them know it exists and I can make it available to them such that they have a choice. Is this unreasonable? Certainly, I accept the point that in presenting the option of Dharma requires great skill. Just as presenting thirsty people with a glass of polluted water in a dirty glass would be unhelpful, so to must I be wise in how I present the Dharma, but in terms of giving people the option to quench their thirst, I see no problem. What problem is it that you see?

Water is a neutral thing.

One religion over another is not a neutral thing.

mindatrisk

vinlyn said:

mindatrisk said:

Think of it this way... If there were a million people dying of thirst, would you not seek to provide them with the option of water? Would you not go to them and say 'here is some water, this will help you'...? You could not make them drink the water, just as I cannot make anyone engage or practice the Dharma, but I can let them know it exists and I can make it available to them such that they have a choice. Is this unreasonable? Certainly, I accept the point that in presenting the option of Dharma requires great skill. Just as presenting thirsty people with a glass of polluted water in a dirty glass would be unhelpful, so to must I be wise in how I present the Dharma, but in terms of giving people the option to quench their thirst, I see no problem. What problem is it that you see?

Water is a neutral thing.

One religion over another is not a neutral thing.

I am not teaching a religion.

vinlyn

"Spreading the Dharma... Guerrilla style!"

Your words.

mindatrisk

The Dharma is not a religion. The Dharma gives birth to religions, certainly, but the Dharma itself is not a religion, it is pure understanding, it is 'the correct perspective'. It is universal, Jesus taught it, Buddha taught it, Gandhi taught it, as well as many others, for it is accessible to all and innate in us all. How it arises depends upon many factors, and how it is understood and shared depends upon many too. But the Dharma is for all. It is the truthblood that runs through us all. You may associate the Dharma with Buddhism, but Buddhism is a vehicle for the Dharma - Buddhism is not the Dharma.

vinlyn

Yeah, right. So you are posting your messages on Hindu and Christian sites, as well?

MaryAnne

^^ I have a feeling you've opened a huge can of worms just now....... LOL :hair:

mindatrisk

vinlyn said:

Yeah, right. So you are posting your messages on Hindu and Christian sites, as well?

I like Buddhism because I think the Buddha presented the purest and widest understanding of the Dharma.

MaryAnne

mindatrisk said:

vinlyn said:

Yeah, right. So you are posting your messages on Hindu and Christian sites, as well?

I like Buddhism because I think the Buddha presented the purest and widest understanding of the Dharma.

And I'm sure Christians feel the same way about the words of Jesus and the gospels; being the purest and surest words of wisdom and understanding.

Sure, I guess you can take the Bible 'out of Christianity' and hold it alone on its own, but you can't take the Christianity out of the Bible. Same thing with the Dharma, IMO.

mindatrisk

MaryAnne said:

mindatrisk said:

vinlyn said:

Yeah, right. So you are posting your messages on Hindu and Christian sites, as well?

I like Buddhism because I think the Buddha presented the purest and widest understanding of the Dharma.

And I'm sure Christians feel the same way about the words of Jesus and the gospels; being the purest and surest words of wisdom and understanding.

Sure, I guess you can take the Bible 'out of Christianity' and hold it alone on its own, but you can't take the Christianity out of the Bible. Same thing with the Dharma, IMO.

Of course, everyone is free to think and believe as they wish! But wisdom is wisdom whichever package it is in. If something works then it works. I simply wish to share what works for the benefit of human happiness. This I call the Dharma, but what is a name, aye? I read A Course in Miracles, a Christian-esque book, and in it The Holy Spirit is described as a force that 'corrects perception' to heal our mind... kinda sounds like the Dharma to me! I'm not sure you could take the Bible out of Christianity. But you could take the wisdom from the Bible and hold it alone, as well as teach it to all and anyone simply as wisdom, and it would benefit all, including Buddhists. I am just interested in wisdom - in what works to help others.

MaryAnne

Well, @mindatrisk, I get what you're saying, however I disagree. Why?

Because I feel (IMO) there is no place in (the teaching of) the wisdom of the Dharma for aggressiveness in/or proselytizing.
To present the Dharma in "guerrilla" mode seems counterproductive and frankly, based in arrogance and Ego. Kinda goes against the whole core value of the Dharma, no?

mindatrisk

It depends what you think 'guerrilla' means. I mean it as unconventional, flexible, adaptive, as well as skilful and creative. The thread I started at UK Business Forums pretty much reflects what it is i'm doing, i.e. sharing Dharma wisdom with a new audience in a way that is accessible (I hope!) and relevant to their lives (I hope!). Have you read through that thread? If you wish to understand what i'm attempting to do then it is a perfect example. I'm not sure what makes that arrogant or of ego. Why do you think this?

mindatrisk

Here again is the thread...

http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=309934

Do you think that I am being aggressive or that I am proselytising? I don't think I am, but i'm open to suggestions and critique. I have much to learn, and i'll continue to adapt and seek more appropriate ways of sharing the Dharma, but what i'm outlining here is the idea.

mindatrisk

A further question (sorry!), having read through the discussion in the thread at the UK Business Forums, do you think it was the wrong thing to do to start that discussion? Do you see no value in such discussions being prompted?

vinlyn

I'd call it stealth proselytizing, and that is deceitful.

And if it's not, why not just post at the end of each message, "I like Buddhism because I think the Buddha presented the purest and widest understanding of the Dharma." (Again, your words).

robot

In your discussion on the business forum, you are not teaching Buddhism. If you were you would have started at the beginning. With the truth of suffering. To talk about anger is to put the cart before the horse. You really can't tell someone that they are suffering, then teach them how to end it. They need to realize that they are suffering themselves.
So you are teaching your own version of the Dharma. Which is fine and time will tell whether you can fill it out enough to make it work.
In the meantime, if you fall back on the Buddhas teachings piecemeal, you will run the risk of misconstrueing them. At some point you will be called on it or accused of evangelizing, and may turn people away from considering Buddhism. Bad karma all around.
My 2cents? Leave the Buddha out of it, unless you are talking intimately to people you know, or are sure that someone wants to hear about it because they have asked you.

mindatrisk

vinlyn said:

I'd call it stealth proselytizing, and that is deceitful.

And if it's not, why not just post at the end of each message, "I like Buddhism because I think the Buddha presented the purest and widest understanding of the Dharma." (Again, your words).

I have already said that I have no interest in promoting Buddhism, let alone converting anyone, so this 'proselytising' angle really is redundant. I am simply sharing wisdom and understanding that I hope will help people. There is nothing else to it. Why would I end each message with 'I like Buddhism because I think the Buddha presented the purest and widest understanding of the Dharma'. To what end?

mindatrisk

robot said:

In your discussion on the business forum, you are not teaching Buddhism. If you were you would have started at the beginning. With the truth of suffering. To talk about anger is to put the cart before the horse. You really can't tell someone that they are suffering, then teach them how to end it. They need to realize that they are suffering themselves.
So you are teaching your own version of the Dharma. Which is fine and time will tell whether you can fill it out enough to make it work.
In the meantime, if you fall back on the Buddhas teachings piecemeal, you will run the risk of misconstrueing them. At some point you will be called on it or accused of evangelizing, and may turn people away from considering Buddhism. Bad karma all around.
My 2cents? Leave the Buddha out of it, unless you are talking intimately to people you know, or are sure that someone wants to hear about it because they have asked you.

Indeed, I am absolutely not teaching Buddhism, the Buddha is left out of it, which is exactly what i've been saying! I am teaching the Dharma - or, in this one discussion - an aspect of the Dharma. Maybe i'll start a thread on worry and anxiety next time, or maybe on forgiveness, who knows? It doesn't matter. I don't need a full philosophy to help people. I don't need to be a fully trained medical doctor to put someone's arm in a sling. Nor does anyone need a full philosophy in order to benefit from a particular teaching.

MaryAnne

OK, I skimmed through the first 5 pages of that thread, @mindatrisk...
really not into reading more than that.

No, you're not being aggressive. Persistent? Yes. Aggressive? No.

Are you proselytizing? Hmmm, ok, gotta say 'No' there as well.

Are you teaching the Dharma?
Sorry, but I also have to say "no" here too.

Granted, you are giving good, positive advice about controlling/changing/managing anger. Although I don't think you've cornered the market on all the possible good advice one can give regarding anger.... but that's neither here nor there.

So, even you said before, you can find the same wisdom in the Bible, the Koran, The Old Testament, the gospels, etc.

So how does that sort out to be "teaching the Dharma" to the masses? I'm not sure I see your point and THE point, you know?

robot

mindatrisk said:

robot said:

In your discussion on the business forum, you are not teaching Buddhism. If you were you would have started at the beginning. With the truth of suffering. To talk about anger is to put the cart before the horse. You really can't tell someone that they are suffering, then teach them how to end it. They need to realize that they are suffering themselves.
So you are teaching your own version of the Dharma. Which is fine and time will tell whether you can fill it out enough to make it work.
In the meantime, if you fall back on the Buddhas teachings piecemeal, you will run the risk of misconstrueing them. At some point you will be called on it or accused of evangelizing, and may turn people away from considering Buddhism. Bad karma all around.
My 2cents? Leave the Buddha out of it, unless you are talking intimately to people you know, or are sure that someone wants to hear about it because they have asked you.

Indeed, I am absolutely not teaching Buddhism, the Buddha is left out of it, which is exactly what i've been saying! I am teaching the Dharma - or, in this one discussion - an aspect of the Dharma. Maybe i'll start a thread on worry and anxiety next time, or maybe on forgiveness, who knows? It doesn't matter. I don't need a full philosophy to help people. I don't need to be a fully trained medical doctor to put someone's arm in a sling. Nor does anyone need a full philosophy in order to benefit from a particular teaching.

You have borrowed Shantideva's analogy about covering the world with leather or wearing shoes, and you have referred to Buddha's teaching. Which is to be expected because that's where you have gained your own understanding. No problem.
You are going to need to have a thick skin to do what you are attempting. Good luck.
Why not paste a link to this thread on the business forum? Short cut the whole process.

mindatrisk

MaryAnne said:

So, even you said before, you can find the same wisdom in the Bible, the Koran, The Old Testament, the gospels, etc.

So how does that sort out to be "teaching the Dharma" to the masses? I'm not sure I see your point and THE point, you know?

I appreciate you reading the discussion and your humility in response too... certain signs of a very wise mind.

What is 'THE point'? Well, there are many, many people who are angry, and that anger is causing many, many problems for themselves and for many others on this planet. I suspect that most of these people are not acting with a full understanding of anger and the various points I brought up in the discussion. If they are aware then maybe they will reflect upon their anger and, perhaps, make efforts to reduce it, thus benefiting themselves and others too. All well and good, right? And no different to what any spiritual tradition attempts to do.

But the point is that for all these spiritual traditions anger still exists in abundance upon our planet... so why not change tact? Why not reach out to those who are traditionally spiritually skeptical / reluctant (as many at the Business forums are) and who are, therefore, missing out on teachings that would help them with anger, worry, fear etc. with the aim of helping them? Is the discussion at the forums not a positive thing? Might it not be helpful to them? Is it worth me reaching out to them? Would they be better off left alone? Might the discussion not trigger something in them that might lead them to explore the issues raised and then make changes? How many of those people reading or engaging in that discussion might otherwise never have even begun to think about anger?

All in all, forgetting the confusion that can be caused through discussing concepts, if I were to continue engaging in discussions like the one on anger with new audiences, would this be a good thing or bad thing?

mindatrisk

robot said:

mindatrisk said:

robot said:

In your discussion on the business forum, you are not teaching Buddhism. If you were you would have started at the beginning. With the truth of suffering. To talk about anger is to put the cart before the horse. You really can't tell someone that they are suffering, then teach them how to end it. They need to realize that they are suffering themselves.
So you are teaching your own version of the Dharma. Which is fine and time will tell whether you can fill it out enough to make it work.
In the meantime, if you fall back on the Buddhas teachings piecemeal, you will run the risk of misconstrueing them. At some point you will be called on it or accused of evangelizing, and may turn people away from considering Buddhism. Bad karma all around.
My 2cents? Leave the Buddha out of it, unless you are talking intimately to people you know, or are sure that someone wants to hear about it because they have asked you.

Indeed, I am absolutely not teaching Buddhism, the Buddha is left out of it, which is exactly what i've been saying! I am teaching the Dharma - or, in this one discussion - an aspect of the Dharma. Maybe i'll start a thread on worry and anxiety next time, or maybe on forgiveness, who knows? It doesn't matter. I don't need a full philosophy to help people. I don't need to be a fully trained medical doctor to put someone's arm in a sling. Nor does anyone need a full philosophy in order to benefit from a particular teaching.

You have borrowed Shantideva's analogy about covering the world with leather or wearing shoes, and you have referred to Buddha's teaching. Which is to be expected because that's where you have gained your own understanding. No problem.
You are going to need to have a thick skin to do what you are attempting. Good luck.
Why not paste a link to this thread on the business forum? Short cut the whole process.

Short cut what process?

Thick skin is DEFINITELY not needed! This could never be achieved through thick skin. All attack, all abuse, all ridicule, all distortion etc. etc. is born of suffering. Someone may attack me, laugh at me, abuse me, but this is their suffering over-flowing, and all I need to do is imagine what the content of that suffering may be for compassion and softness to arise. Plus, there are soooo many little tactics that help. For example, I make it a rule to never reply to a line of attack. A further rule is to find a good point they made, recognise it, and respond thoughtfully to it. This discourages attack, and encourages thinking.

robot

Shortcut the process of helping people by letting them understand what you are trying to achieve. Allow them to decide on your credibility.
Don't you think that this forum could help those people who are interested?

mindatrisk

My honest feeling is that that would be very unskilful. It would compromise my future in those forums. It would appear to be manipulative, and it could very easily be misunderstood. They will decide for themselves whether I am credible based upon the discussions I have with them. I think there are some who will in time benefit from a forum such as this, but I don't have much confidence in these forums as a place of compassion and understanding. Not to tar everyone, but some people can be quite rude. Now, I can handle that, but if someone came here for the first time with an open heart and open mind and received some of the responses that i've received then it could be very discouraging. However, if someone took a sincere interest in what i'm talking about and enquired about where they could explore further then i'd point them towards Buddhism, certainly, and from there i'm sure they'd look to access a community such as this one.

MaryAnne

Wait a minute... you don't think it's manipulative to be "teaching people the Dharma" without them knowing it, or without being upfront as to where this 'teaching' comes from?
And, you criticize some of us, in this forum, for being 'rude' and don't want to expose your friends from a business forum to our antics? Hmmph. Interesting.

So you'll coddle them like sensitive children on one hand, (not exposing them to us) and yet deceive them on the other hand (not being upfront about what you are 'teaching' them)...

I think that's very manipulative, and frankly, odd.

robot

Yes, people can be rude and uncompassionate here. Like anywhere else. People are people. That's the point. It's regular people who practice Buddhism. If someone is put off by that, they should find some new age, feel good approach where everyone smiles sweetly and never gets angry or hurt.