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?
how
Veteran Veteran
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.
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.
1
Comments
Similarly, I use the label 'Buddhist' or not.
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.
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.
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..
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).
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.
So much for Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc...
I don't get it. :rolleyes:
Universal confusion.
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
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...
In your view, what would Buddha talk about with someone
who has left 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.
Fair enough. The label aspect was brought into the discussion, thats just
maybe where I get confused.
I need labels to discuss things.
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.