Buddhadharma and Marxism

Craig

It may seem like a contradiction to be a Buddhist and Marxist since many Marxists have stated that "religion is the opiate of the masses".

I recently have been drawn to Marxism on the good aspects of it, equality for all, healthcare and things like that that will help societies.

What I have a problem with is the anti-religious viewpoint.
I may not be the best practitioner on the planet and my practice has waned lately, but I still find Buddhism helpful in many ways.

What should I do? Take the good from Marxism and leave the rest making my own viewpoint, or should I continue down the path only? I feel strange since I have Marxist friends and everything (I also have non-communist friends).

What are your viewpoints on communism?
Can I be both communist and Buddhist or is it only going to contradict leading me nowhere?

KnightofBuddha

I would say that Buddhism does not contradict any particular economic philosophies. Growing up in America, I found a deep rooted hatred for anything communist within most Americans. Half of them couldn't tell you what communism was or who Karl Marx is for that matter. I myself am quite fond of capitalism. It allows for progressivism and lets people for the most part control their own businesses and destinies. Essentially it means the less government control the better. My grievance with America though is that as rich as we are, there is still no free healthcare for all citizens. It is apalling really. Other socialist governments in the world have higher taxes, but at least the government does something for it's citizens.

Although the name has faded into the recesses of my memory, I recall reading a quote from a Catholic bishop last year who lived in America during the Bolshevik Revolution. When questioned whether or not he was a socialistt, he replied,

"If you're asking whether or not people should be endowed with personal property, and freedom of business, than yes I am a capitalist. If you're asking whether or not people should all be treated equally, and be respected and cared for by their government, then yes I am a socialist."

federica

If you take away the label, "Buddhist" but consider the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path - what can you find in Marxism/Communism that can dispute them?

If you find something, ask yourself which as better stood the test of time.....

Simonthepilgrim

There is an interesting debate within Marxism which is parallelled in Buddhism, about freedom/liberation. It was the crux of Sartre's rejection of traditional Marxist philosophy of personality.

It revolves around the concept of an underlying freedom, BuddhaNature, sugatagarbha. Sartre says:

Si l'homme n'est pas originellement libre, on ne peut même pas concevoir ce que pourrait être sa libération.
Marxisme et Révolution

Liberation thus becomes the objective aspect of a subjective freedom which precedes and permits all other liberation.

The question then arises as to whether humans need to be freed. There are echoes of this within Christianity too (Once Saved Always Saved) and Sartre opposes the Marxist concept of liberating the proletariat through restucturing society with his demand for personal engagement and choice.

There are also close resonances between Marxist and Buddhist dialectics.

We must be very careful, in the post-Soviet era, not to confuse the structures and philosophy of Marx and Engels with the abominations of Stalinist 'communism'. Indeed, it is possible to read [SIZE=-1]Solzhenytzin or Pasternak as examinations of Sartre's boutade that he was never so free as under the Occupation.

(By 'coincidence', I have been reflecting on and writing about this precise point in the past few days)
[/SIZE]

buddhafoot

As I've stated before - I believe the downfalling of Socialism is that humans are involved. While there is greed, ego, status-craving, etc. it will never work. As Mr. Orwell once said, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Other than that - I can't see how treating others an an equal, making sure they are provided for and taken care of, etc. could be considered a bad thing.

-bf

Brigid

Don't forget that Communism and Socialism are two different things.

buddhafoot

True - but some people feel that communism is still a branch of the socialist movement. They also share many of the same traits.

-bf

Palzang

Trying to find a political system that would liberate people is about as hopeless as trying to find a way to fly to the moon without a rocketship. You have to start with the realization that samsara is hopelessly flawed. You can't find the solution to samsara within samsara. The only way to exit samsara is through the method laid out by Lord Buddha, who teaches from the perspective of enlightened mind.

Palzang

Craig

I think I'll stay with the Dharma...equality is wonderful...but if you view everyone as a buddha, then isn't that like making them equal?
I know I'm lax with my practice, and I'm not the most intelligent Buddhist, but I love it.

Simonthepilgrim

Palzang wrote:

Trying to find a political system that would liberate people is about as hopeless as trying to find a way to fly to the moon without a rocketship. You have to start with the realization that samsara is hopelessly flawed. You can't find the solution to samsara within samsara. The

up to this word, I was cheering

only

Oh dear!

way to exit samsara is through the method laid out by Lord Buddha, who teaches from the perspective of enlightened mind.

Palzang

Ultimately, this is the only word that separates us!

When Pope John XXIII of blessed memory was meeting Patriarch Athanagoras, the first time since the Great Schisms that the Patriarchs of East and West had met, the Eastern bishop said: "Only a hair separates us", meaning the 'iota subscript', the theological excuse for the schism. John is said to have replied: "A hair as thick as your beard, Holiness."

And it is the problem for people like me. I know I am not alone in my unease. As soon as I hear the word "only", I am like Bismark when he heard the word Kultur: I want to reach for the gun I never owned. That the "method laid out by Lord Buddha" may be effective and, even, the most effective means is disputed by millions and asserted by other millions. Whilst I would be among the first to acknowledge that truth does not depend on democratic assent, it's scope should be recognised. Pythagoras theorem will, when applied, give you the length of the hypotenuse of a right triangle, every time, without fail. I have yet to find a "method" that can make the same boast. This is particularly true when, within the "method" itself are recursive and, occasionally, antagonistic 'sub-methods'.

Exactly the same argument obtains in respect of the religious "methods" which offer similar transformation, in this world or a subsequent one whose existence one is required to accept.

As you know, I have a set of beliefs which include a belief and interest in what I term the Mystery: the capital letter makes it Important! but it may be no more important than becoming fully aware of the excitement of collecting train numbers is to the train-spotter.

I suppose that I read the hundred hands of Avalokiteshvara, the "many mansions" of Jesus ' Father, the hundred eyes of Argus in the peacock's tail as saying that there is more than one path, but that all lead back to the same origin.

As Heraclitus said, and Eliot quotes:

The way up and the way down are the same.

questZENer

I would LOVE to hear about the Mystery, Simon. How about a new thread? I have (very underdevelopped) shadow musings about it as well...

Palzang

Simonthepilgrim wrote:

[/size][/b]up to this word, I was cheering[/b]Oh dear!
Ultimately, this is the only word that separates us!

When Pope John XXIII of blessed memory was meeting Patriarch Athanagoras, the first time since the Great Schisms that the Patriarchs of East and West had met, the Eastern bishop said: "Only a hair separates us", meaning the 'iota subscript', the theological excuse for the schism. John is said to have replied: "A hair as thick as your beard, Holiness."

And it is the problem for people like me. I know I am not alone in my unease. As soon as I hear the word "only", I am like Bismark when he heard the word Kultur: I want to reach for the gun I never owned. That the "method laid out by Lord Buddha" may be effective and, even, the most effective means is disputed by millions and asserted by other millions. Whilst I would be among the first to acknowledge that truth does not depend on democratic assent, it's scope should be recognised. Pythagoras theorem will, when applied, give you the length of the hypotenuse of a right triangle, every time, without fail. I have yet to find a "method" that can make the same boast. This is particularly true when, within the "method" itself are recursive and, occasionally, antagonistic 'sub-methods'.

Exactly the same argument obtains in respect of the religious "methods" which offer similar transformation, in this world or a subsequent one whose existence one is required to accept.

As you know, I have a set of beliefs which include a belief and interest in what I term the Mystery: the capital letter makes it Important! but it may be no more important than becoming fully aware of the excitement of collecting train numbers is to the train-spotter.

I suppose that I read the hundred hands of Avalokiteshvara, the "many mansions" of Jesus ' Father, the hundred eyes of Argus in the peacock's tail as saying that there is more than one path, but that all lead back to the same origin.

As Heraclitus said, and Eliot quotes:

When the Dalai Lama attended an interfaith conference at Gethsemane in Tennessee, he said that while it was interesting to compare faiths, in truth Buddhism was not the same as Christianity despite many similarities. I think that what he was saying is that Buddhism can take one farther than other religions. That may not be PC to say, but I think it's what he was saying.

shambala

I found this quote on a couple of Buddhist sites, but it gives no references, if anyone finds any references to this quote by Karl Marx, please tell:


15. KARL MARX:
If religion is the soul of soulless conditions, the heart of the heartless world and the opium of the people, then Buddhism, certainly is not such a religion. If religion is meant a system of deliverance from the ills of life, then Buddhism is the religion of religions.

ajani_mgo

Ah, why not we compare fundametalist-literalist Buddhism to capitalism too?

"Self-salvation"... Don't expect anyone to help you dude...

And correctly see that Communism is a form of political and economical control, while democracy is a political control and capitalism an economical control?

I guess if we compare Buddhism to anything, it is anything including democracy (equality of the political type, too!)... The human mind likes to link things up isn't it? It's about the same with how we draw similarities between religions, people, cultures etc. etc.

Speaking about the Pope, I guess he really had a wrong choice for the speech... :rockon:

MartinofNorwich

"The only way to exit samsara is through the method laid out by Lord Buddha".

Maybe. I don't know.

But if the elements of the "method" are present, does it matter if they are called "Buddhism" or something else, or even nothing at all?

Martin.

Simonthepilgrim

This thread appeared to be getting a bit 'heady', so I have posted in a new thread:
Faith and hope