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.
Spending Time With Stephen Batchelor.
Citta
Veteran
Batchelor seems to have become a bit of a boogieman to some. Someone to scare the Buddhist kiddiewinks with.
It might be of interest to learn a little of what it is like to spend time in his company, and that of his wife Martine ?
What comes over most strongly is their kindness and sensitivity to others.
They do not talk about their absence of belief in Rebirth when talking informally... there is absolutely no glint of fanaticism in their eyes.
They do not present at all as people who know that others are wrong.
They do not criticise others.
They are always encouraging to others regarding meditation practice.
They each spend a good deal of time each day on the cushion.
And its all done with kindness and gentleness.
It might be of interest to learn a little of what it is like to spend time in his company, and that of his wife Martine ?
What comes over most strongly is their kindness and sensitivity to others.
They do not talk about their absence of belief in Rebirth when talking informally... there is absolutely no glint of fanaticism in their eyes.
They do not present at all as people who know that others are wrong.
They do not criticise others.
They are always encouraging to others regarding meditation practice.
They each spend a good deal of time each day on the cushion.
And its all done with kindness and gentleness.
2
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
And that included several very faith-based Theravada Buddhists, who were very much into devas and rebirth and levels of existence. The faith-followers had nothing but good things to say after their retreat.
So, that's nice.
The converse of those who ( to quote The Incredible String Band ) "
" Know all the words
and have sung all the notes
but have never quite learned the song. ".
" Wrong views " are not just a matter of correcting credence to things not personally experienced..
Wrong views are any view that needs defending.
I certainly have no ill feelings toward the man. Maybe it's a matter of the printed word and his niceness getting lost in translation. But we are left with the question then of why his printed works (and transcribed interviews) have an edgy tone of proselytization combined with imagery of battles, camps and fault lines.
seen him with various people who accept literal post mortem rebirth and his aim with them and with everyone else at all times is to encourage practice practice practice..That is his priority.
Someone I know wanted to do a highly traditional retreat taught by a teacher who sees post mortem rebirth as an essential belief PRIOR to practice..However he was short of cash..
Guess who helped him out financially ...
Regarding your OP, lots of Buddhist newbies are looking for a mum and dad. I understand where you're coming from. I bet they are very nice people—sweet as chocolate pie. But being super nice and sweet doesn't mean Stephen and Martine and Mr. & Mrs. Buddha. Far from it.
I don't know anything about Bachelor, but I can tell you that I'd rather learn from a kind though not as bright person than a highly intelligent, well read person without an ounce of warmth.
You can memorize and repeat all the suttas you like, but if you haven't even got basic kindness down then you don't understand the dharma at all.
Of course, there is always room for tough love, but emphasis on the love, you know? (I think a TV judge said that but he was right
But strictly speaking kindness is categorized into relative bodhicitta of the first five paramitas. The bodhisattva practices it in order to become attractive to sentient beings. (and just because it is the right thing and feels good). But the wisdom is the equinimity produced by letting go of craving/ignorance etc
In TB there is a union of compassion and wisdom. So lack of one is evident of the lack of another.
Note: I am not the compassion police. :thumbsup:
You can be crazy intelligent and not wise at all.
It is.
With kindness,
Sabre
Most Lamas know this and I am sure Mr. Batchelor knows this, too. While almost anyone use the four means (yes, even politicians), this doesn't mean they've realized the unborn.
:om:
Don't forget that the actual bodhisattva path comes from the vast vision of liberating beings. Don't just grasp onto (the bliss of) the vision and forget what the vision is trying to accomplish.
Liturgy of my sangha:
"The past is only a thought.
Now I can look on to others with joy that is open and clear
sensing their goodness..
Wisdom of my heart please instruct me
Don't leave me in the dark
Come now and show me the pathway and how to bring others a light
You are forever within me\
YOu are the light of my life
Please never turn away from me
Stay with me till the end of the path
Even as I pray to my hearts light
the fire of wisdom and love
stirs in my heart and fills me
with
All of this is given for others
that they find this open way too
the way of the heart that is within us
May they awaken us all"
Also keep in mind that Bodhisattvas are not carnal beings—they are spiritual.
I'm talking about helping sentient beings.
Perhaps there is a relationship between realizing Mind and the first five paramitas. There certainly is? Incidentally, you didn't respond to my saying that the bodhisattva practices the paramitas :J)
You can't practice paramitas or the bhumis without first accomplishing bodhicittotpada. How is a prithagjana with his bestial skandha body going to accomplish other than samsara? He can't even save himself.
Why does it say in the Diamond Cutter Sutra, " And yet, although innumerable beings have thus been led to Nirvana, no being at all has been led to Nirvana"?
Really, if one wants to find "wrong views" in Buddhism, one needn't look very far. There already was a tangled plethora of contradictory views long before Batchelor came along.
And I agree with the OP; Stephen and Martine are very soft-spoken, and they function from a place of compassion, not ego or dogma.
Still isn't it fun to pretend we/you/one is/are a boddhisattva? :P
But my central thesis is that if you don't see the paramitas practiced it is not a bodhisattva though it could be a hardworking solitary realizer or drug store occultist or something in between.
You might not be feeling the rubbing the wrong way, but I certainly see time and time again people feeling he is an 'evangelical agnostic'. Anyway that's the term I coined for him: 'gesticulating evangelical agnostic'.
Great point in what I quoted though. We are in samsara and we all disagree. That's just the way it is. Luckily we don't have to agree and we all set our own course of course in friendship at times.
_/\_
It's actually similar to this thread. A vague 'modern Buddhists'. Batchelor did the same thing and made sweeping generalizations covering all traditions such as: "meditation is (taught as) transcendental (by the establishment)."
The Buddhist Dharma is an incredibly deep and vast teaching. Its also known as 'Universal Law', or the truth about existence. Truth here is divided into plain and absolute truths. Plain truth is of course everyday things which we see, read,touch and experience. One whose minds are twisted or sick would then see this differently, so there is a 'normal' level of comprehension for all.
While the absolute truth is beyond most people's comprehension! Sure, you read all the written material on the Dharma and translate it into thought,... mental fabrications.
Rubbish in, rubbish out........truth in, truth out, as well.
BUT, how much of the written material is true or correct, even some of the Mahayana sutras are suspect, what more modern material by so called masters?
Coming back, what is the absolute truth? Well, the Buddha has taught us (go read the Nikayas), one might very well comprehend the written word and explanation by famous speakers, but is there really realisation?????
Yes, this word, to realise the truth of the teachings, this is very profound, yet subtle, yet enlightening.
Thats why masters are described as having certain 'realisations'.
The Buddha has said of the Dharma's decay setting in, esp when self proclaimed experts start compiling their own version(s), "OH! I understand and like these bits but not the others, and of course add in my own interpretations, my added signature bits, for sure". This has happened everytime a cult or branch, or new chapter or religion or club or whatever has started.
To recognise and realise the ultimate truths require innate wisdom, having 30 years of Dharma studies and being extremely kind, compassionate does not guarantee anything beyond the mundane. Only perhaps an exalted image of one's own worth. Things are compounded when they start teaching their warped virulent ideas.
I, very much stick to the original Dharma, trying to expand and expound on it.
We all can imagine being in outer space, after all having read and seen movies, one can literally feel the sensation, but is it the same as being there. (this is only an example, no, I've not been in there too). This is whats realisation about, we can only describe it, cant bring you there, too bad, everyone has their own journey of discovery, whether its upwards/ downwards to other realms or just the neighbouring county.
To cherry pick on the original Tripitaka, saying its outdated, not for todays lifestyle, means the person hasnt understood enough. Hang in there, keep an open mind, meditate correctly, the realisations might just be round the corner.
One cant prefer to stay on the top storey and demolish the ground floor, bcos you dont agree with it.
Remember, Mother Theresa prayed for her whole life without getting a glimpse of her God, but she didnt pack it in and most importantly, cherry pick on her Institutions
core beliefs and start a new teaching.......................
And I think I know on this thread who walks the talk, and who is deluded.
I will leave it there.
_/\_
Songhill, my good friend, Buddhism is much simpler than you can ever hope for right now--take my word for it. There is nothing subtle about it. It is the ground beneath our feet and the silence between thoughts. It's giving without expectation of reward. The Bodhisattva vows are simple and direct, as is the Dharma we practice.
It's nothing special. A hundred Zen masters have tried to tell people that and been ignored.
I know people can communicate very differently in different settings - print, interview, intimate classroom, dharma teaching - yet it seems to me the concept of "Buddhists at war" would have to be somewhat at the forefront of his thinking for it to come up regularly in his writings and interviews. If it is the case that it doesn't come up in person, why emphasize it in writing, but de-emphasize it in person?
But I have seen a difference between the writings of teachers and the way they speak before. I think the real problem in some cases is that tone can be difficult to comprehend through writing because so much of our communication is non verbal. If the guy was speaking the words in his book perhaps they would seem more gentle.
Like I said though, this is a general comment, I don't know Bachelor at all.
Shame on you.