Being a Buddhist doesn't mean renouncing social engagement.

Jason

Being a Buddhist doesn't mean renouncing social engagement.

Cinorjer

A very even-handed essay on the virtues of socially engagement for Buddhists.

David

Sweet article, Jason.

Namaste

Simonthepilgrim

Thank you, Jason. For me, coming as I do from a Christian tradition of permanent social engagement, Buddhism became a viable option when I encountered the work of Joanna Macy and the Shanti AIDS movement in California - although at a distance. As you point out, some Buddhist societies not only value but also beautify the natural world around them. An abiding memory is of the shock of beauty from the gardens at the Norbulinka Institute in Himachal Pradech when compared with the desolate Indian landscape around.

Thus, Buddhism, for me, invited me to a deeper engagement with ecology and the environment, including, above all, the human ecology. Working with those earliest HIV/AIDS patients reinforced my view that we must listen to and respond to the wounded and vulnerable - and that Buddhist practice enhances that ability to listen, hear and respond affirmatively and with compassion.

Whilst not wishing to play down the importance that some Buddhist attach to their personal practice, it is my view that unless we engage with others and the world around us, we risk betraying the deep message of the moment that the Shakyamuni Buddha decided to go out into the world to teach the ending of dukkha.

Jainarayan

Nice essay @Jason.

Like @Simonthepilgrim I come from a Christian background (way back). However, I still fall back on much of Jesus's teachings, some of which include getting out there to show compassion, render assistance, and as importantly, be a light to the world and set an example. There is the quote often attributed to St. Francis of Assisi: "Preach the gospel, and when you have to, use words".

Vastmind

"....Preach the gospel, and when you have to, use words".

AMEN to that!
*throws hand up*.....(having a church moment)

betaboy

Vastmind said:

"
*throws hand up*.....(having a church moment)

Hopefully not Baptist. Just kidding.

betaboy

People who say samsara can't be fixed - they take care of themselves - they eat when they're hungry, seek medical attention when sick, etc. They don't say, "Samsara is imperfect, so let me not worry about my health or wellbeing. It is futile anyway."

Therefore, what applies to them as individuals will apply to the world at large.

Jeffrey

Trungpa Rinpoche evisioned an enlightened society where beings are educated in meditaiton and other mind training. He called it Shambhala. So I have to agree with @Jason's post. On the other hand we cannot fix samsara because of birth and death and all in between fosters ignorance and craving. We can feed and cloth the needy and that's great, but it does not liberate them from samsara. So I think we should follow a path of taming our mind so we feel better. But then we take on the Bodhisattva ideal and TRAIN the mind to help beings. The bodhisattva vows to save all beings even though that is impossible. We can give three types of gifts: material, fearlessness, and dharma teachings.

Prometheus

Yes, a thousand times yes. A Buddhist who only cares about their own happiness, and doesn't give a damn about the world, is a selfish, borderline sociopathic Buddhist. That's an oxymoron. I'm surprised that some think that this is debatable.

federica

They're not Buddhist, period. I'm surprised you didn't actually consider that in your response........

Several

I find its not really a problem being in samsara as long as you're somewhat detached from it. If the train is late you could fly into a rage or accept that sometimes trains are late. You can only really minimise the impact of samsara anyway. The forest tradition as mentioned does this. Laypeople still come to these temples, food must be aquired, bills paid. As I said though, its attachment thats the problem and not the phenomena itself. All things are as they should be, though maybe not from our perspective.

pegembara

Being a Buddhist doesn't mean renouncing social engagement.

Yes and no. For the lay practitioner, there is dana/generosity and sila/virtue. One can be a socially engaged Buddhist, Christian, Muslim or atheist.

For the bhikkhus/monastics/serious practioners there is some form of disengagement from the world and things pertaining to the world. That is transcendence.

That is the path that the noble ones walk on.

A number of discourses (among them, SN 35.191; AN 6.63) make the point that the mind is fettered, not by things like the five aggregates or the objects of the six senses, but by the act of passion & delight for them. There are two ways to try to cut through this fetter. One is to focus on the drawbacks of passion & delight in & of themselves, seeing clearly the stress & suffering they engender in the mind. The other is to analyze the objects of passion & delight in such a way that they no longer seem worthy of interest. This second approach is the one recommended in this discourse: when the Buddha talks of "smashing, scattering, & demolishing form (etc.) and making it unfit for play," he is referring to the practice of analyzing form minutely into its component parts until it no longer seems a fit object for passion & delight. When all five aggregates can be treated in this way, the mind is left with no conditioned object to serve as a focal point for its passion, and so is released — at the very least — to the stage of Awakening called non-return.

"Just as when boys or girls are playing with little sand castles:[4] as long as they are not free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, that's how long they have fun with those sand castles, enjoy them, treasure them, feel possessive of them. But when they become free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, then they smash them, scatter them, demolish them with their hands or feet and make them unfit for play.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn23/sn23.002.than.html

Nele

I was (am?) passionately motiviated by progressive politics. When i began meditation and studying Buddhism this past year I wondered whether and how to create detachment from that interest. Politics in the USA can be divisive and emotionally charged and there were rifts in my own family due to it. I decided to put aside the "wrong path" aspects of being politically active - arguing, listening to talk radio, debating with my conservative family members - but continue with parts I saw as positive. Is it less exciting? Heck yes, and that is good. I feel now the hair-raising excitement of sneering and jeering at "the other side" was a sort of fix for the adrenaline junkie in me, a substitute for character. I hope I am well on my way to more skillful passion.

Reading Thich Nhat Hanh was very useful in this redirection.

Very good article Jason.

Jeffrey

@pegembra, it's hard to tell the difference between delight that is wholesome and delight that is unwholesome. Something as simple as a movie can give one delight. Should we analyze that delight and break it into pieces? Can you walk me through the movie example? A movie affects the emotions and people 'turn on' when they go through their emotions.

Cinorjer

This subject is one that I--to nobody's surprise, I am sure--have strong opinions about. First, I think social engagement is necessary if Buddhism is going to flourish in today's world. The structure of Buddhism hiding behind temple walls while the population is "officially Buddhist" and society supports the monks became obsolete when the world became connected enough that Buddhism has to compete with a multitude of religions and changing populations. The few outposts where people are trying to hang on to this are isolated and still having huge conflicts, such as the tragic Muslim-Buddhist conflict in Myanmar.

The other point I need to make is, there is nothing special about the path of the monks when it comes to the Dharma. I reject the belief that it takes renouncing the world and moving into a temple to become a Buddha. The Forth Noble Truth doesn't say "The way to eliminate suffering is to renounce the world and become a monk". The 8-Fold Path almost requires a normal, mundane life. And after all, the problem is our mind, and we take that with us wherever we go. You think becoming a monk gives someone a special ticket out of the struggles we face raising a family? Monks only trade one job and family and set of worries for another. They get as attached to their temple and Master and station in the temple as any guy in a suit trying to make the quarterly profit.

Jeffrey

@Cinorjer, would you say monks spend more time on the cushion? Do you think cushion time is important?

MaryAnne

@Cinorjer
It appears you and I have very similar thoughts on this... This is why I often find myself completely unimpressed when I hear about this monk or that monk living in self-imposed isolation in order to meditate 20 hrs a day. What does that really accomplish as far as living the Dharma and making the world a better place? Nothing.

How difficult is it to live the Dharma when there is only you to worry about, only your stomach to feed, only your hut or cave to secure and have nothing else and no one else to consider- ever? Not very difficult.

Show me a lay person who 'lives the Dharma' (as best they can) while dealing with spouse, children, work, bills, and other daily responsibilities of community life- and I'll show you someone who really works the Dharma!

I appreciate what monks do, and yes, I even think they are still a necessity - as far as teaching the Dharma, and setting an example in the community. But there is room for improvement as well, and one thing I think would improve the community of monks (worldwide) would be to allow fully ordained female monks. (But that's another discussion).

Jeffrey

Different strokes for different folks: monks and lay people. A monk doesn't have to change and neither does a layperson.

Silouan

The Buddha taught both monastics and laity, but much of what has been passed down was preserved by monks, so what we have was primarily of interest to and directed at them. However, this fact doesn’t imply that only monastics can obtain total cessation of stress.

I think there is much emphasis in speaking about things like interdependence but far less application in analysis. Both monastics and laity are of equal importance, as they are mutually dependent upon and supporting of one another. They aren’t enemies. They need each other. Both should be respected.

Cinorjer

Jeffrey said:

@Cinorjer, would you say monks spend more time on the cushion? Do you think cushion time is important?

I do think it's important. I came out of a Zen practice, and spent my share of time watching paint fade on the wall. However, over the years I came to see this obsession with sitting meditation as being unbalanced in a lot of practices. There's a time to sit, and a time to roll your sleeves up and earn a paycheck, and both are equally practicing the 8-Fold Path. Applying the insights we find in meditation to our daily lives is when you start being a Buddha.

My first Zen teacher, Rev Young, liked to say "Trying to eliminate suffering by shutting yourself behind temple walls is like trying to avoid drowning by moving to the desert. It's better to learn how to swim."

I have great respect for the monks I've been privileged to know, at least the ones who chose the life as a calling. As leaders of the Sangha and guardians of the Dharma, they have devoted their lives to a difficult and unending task. The good ones were too busy helping others to spend a lot of time on their own meditation practice, and maybe those were the ones who really "got it".

DairyLama

If you're an anti-social hedgehog then Buddhism is quite handy....

Vastmind

Some people here might change their mind if they were the ones
in need of help. Who here has been homeless? Who here has gone to
sleep with an empty stomach? Who here has been cast away by society
for whatever reasons and then on top of all that, has no civil rights.
It's easy to say from a warm house, with food in the cupboard and a
check coming in. Easy to say when your the 'right' color. Funny how
interconnected only seems to apply to those who are comfortable. :rolleyes:

I'm done.

Jeffrey

Cinorjer said:

Jeffrey said:

@Cinorjer, would you say monks spend more time on the cushion? Do you think cushion time is important?

I do think it's important. I came out of a Zen practice, and spent my share of time watching paint fade on the wall. However, over the years I came to see this obsession with sitting meditation as being unbalanced in a lot of practices. There's a time to sit, and a time to roll your sleeves up and earn a paycheck, and both are equally practicing the 8-Fold Path. Applying the insights we find in meditation to our daily lives is when you start being a Buddha.

My first Zen teacher, Rev Young, liked to say "Trying to eliminate suffering by shutting yourself behind temple walls is like trying to avoid drowning by moving to the desert. It's better to learn how to swim."

I have great respect for the monks I've been privileged to know, at least the ones who chose the life as a calling. As leaders of the Sangha and guardians of the Dharma, they have devoted their lives to a difficult and unending task. The good ones were too busy helping others to spend a lot of time on their own meditation practice, and maybe those were the ones who really "got it".

In the zen ox-herding pictures going back to the market is the last stage not the first. Remember the task is the unshakeable deliverence of the heart. Helping others is another path. Ayya Khem (sic?) says that the path of the heart is another path in addition to purification of the mind through meditation. I liked what you said in your last paragraph. It helped me to see that you are not poo pooing monks.

Jeffrey

You can't be of full use to beings until enlightenment. Until then you flounder in the poisons occasionally even making it worse for other beings. There is quite a spectrum going from a wife beater to a Buddha. Sure some of us are for the most part kind, reflective, generous people. But a Buddha has the wisdom to help beings as seen in the sutras such as the Pali Canon



May all beings have happiness and the causes of happiness;
May all be free from sorrow and the causes of sorrow;
May all never be separated from the sacred happiness which is sorrowless;
And may all live in equanimity, without too much attachment and too much aversion,
And live believing in the equality of all that lives.
traditional buddhist prayer

MaryAnne

Vastmind said:

Some people here might change their mind if they were the ones
in need of help. Who here has been homeless? Who here has gone to
sleep with an empty stomach? Who here has been cast away by society
for whatever reasons and then on top of all that, has no civil rights.
It's easy to say from a warm house, with food in the cupboard and a
check coming in. Easy to say when your the 'right' color. Funny how
interconnected only seems to apply to those who are comfortable. :rolleyes:

I'm done.

@Vastmind,
I'm not sure who you were 'speaking to' regarding your comment...
Are you saying it's easier to criticize monks from a vantage point of comfort and security (an average layperson's life)? Or are you saying the opposite?
I'm confused... :eek2:

By the way :: raises hand::: I have been homeless, twice. Both times with three kids. I have been hungry in order to make sure my kids were fed. And I have had my utilities turned off (several times) in the past and made do with a wood burning fireplace and extra blankets. I wasn't Buddhist at the time, so I wasn't practicing the Dharma then, but like I said, I'm confused and don't understand what you meant by your comment.....

Vastmind

^^^ Oh sorry...no...I was responding to Jeffrey...

'... We can feed and cloth the needy and that's great, but it does not liberate them from samsara. '

Feeding and clothing people addresses their suffering. A state of suffering we
all could easily be in. It sure liberates them from feelings and states that alot
of middle class white westerners don't know about.

I do think there is a purpose for Monks....but I also think Buddhism is full
of people who are only worried about their own suffering and liberation.
I'm shocked at how people discuss compassion and being empty...yet
getting their hands dirty or participating in social change is just not on
their agenda... <<< This part not directed at Jeffrey.
Just people in general Buddhism who can talk the talk but
can't walk the walk. :grumble:

MaryAnne

^^ Aaaah. Gotcha.
And yes, I agree re: "but I also think Buddhism is full
of people who are only worried about their own suffering and liberation.
I'm shocked at how people discuss compassion and being empty...yet
getting their hands dirty or participating in social change is just not on
their agenda... "

Jeffrey

As I said previously there are only 3 gifts: materials, fearlessness, and dharma. If I donate money to the cub scouts and you donate money to the red cross we are both doing good things. We need not write essays to each other why Green Peace is more important than the Salvation Army.

No we each donate as we have a feeling for. I donate to NAMI (national association of the mentally ill) because it is true to my heart. My Dad donates to the food pantry. I don't have to figure out if food is more important to sanity because I am doing what I am called to do.

Similarly some people are called to give dharma teachings and some people materials or fearlessness.

Peace with each step. Each being contributing in the way that they openly give generosity. No force to donate only freely given. We are all on the same team but we have different callings.

Vastmind

@Jeffrey... I agree with that. I don't believe I was saying different.

I wasn't comparing the engagement...I was calling out those who don't
engage at all. (second part of my post)

Cinorjer

Jeffrey said:

Cinorjer said:

Jeffrey said:

@Cinorjer, would you say monks spend more time on the cushion? Do you think cushion time is important?

I do think it's important. I came out of a Zen practice, and spent my share of time watching paint fade on the wall. However, over the years I came to see this obsession with sitting meditation as being unbalanced in a lot of practices. There's a time to sit, and a time to roll your sleeves up and earn a paycheck, and both are equally practicing the 8-Fold Path. Applying the insights we find in meditation to our daily lives is when you start being a Buddha.

My first Zen teacher, Rev Young, liked to say "Trying to eliminate suffering by shutting yourself behind temple walls is like trying to avoid drowning by moving to the desert. It's better to learn how to swim."

I have great respect for the monks I've been privileged to know, at least the ones who chose the life as a calling. As leaders of the Sangha and guardians of the Dharma, they have devoted their lives to a difficult and unending task. The good ones were too busy helping others to spend a lot of time on their own meditation practice, and maybe those were the ones who really "got it".

In the zen ox-herding pictures going back to the market is the last stage not the first. Remember the task is the unshakeable deliverence of the heart. Helping others is another path. Ayya Khem (sic?) says that the path of the heart is another path in addition to purification of the mind through meditation. I liked what you said in your last paragraph. It helped me to see that you are not poo pooing monks.

Yes, I only go in circles when people ask me if I would follow a different practice if I had to do it again. Maybe what I needed at the time was the discipline of those hours sitting. Maybe I'm missing out on something now, by not putting zazen meditation in the forefront of my current practice. How would I know? That was me then and this is me now. Thanks for reminding me of the ox-herding pictures. I suppose the only thing I can say to anyone is, whatever your practice, do it with all your effort and faith. And if it seems wrong, find another path. Doesn't mean it's wrong, just maybe wrong for who you are right now.

Invincible_summer

When I started to practice Buddhism, I had a hard time with the Mahayana ideas of "saving all sentient beings" and being an "engaged Buddhist," as TNH and Tzu Chi promote. But at the same time, it felt very wrong to me to simply practice for my own benefit.

I eventually came across the concept of one's Circle of Influence/Concern, and I believe it's very helpful regarding how one should approach social engagement. I think I've brought this up before, so apologies if I sound like a broken record, but it's really great!



I think many of us sometimes feel overwhelmed when we look at samsara and think about how to relieve the suffering of others. The Circle of Influence/Concern suggests that we just work on what we can in our current state of influence/power... grasping for a higher goal is unnecessary and even unadvised, as it would perpetuate suffering. Eventually, our Circle of Influence will grow and we can address more of the things in our Circle of Concern.

As @Jeffrey mentioned about the Ten Oxherding Pictures, helping others comes at the end. Our Circle of Influence starts with ourselves.

betaboy

Vastmind said:

@Jeffrey... I agree with that. I don't believe I was saying different.

I wasn't comparing the engagement...I was calling out those who don't
engage at all. (second part of my post)

what of those who want to engage but cant (due to circumstances, inertia, etc.)?

DairyLama

MaryAnne said:

^^ Aaaah. Gotcha.
And yes, I agree re: "but I also think Buddhism is full
of people who are only worried about their own suffering and liberation.

That hasn't been my experience, if anything the reverse. And if people get involved in Buddhism and start doing practices like metta bhavana and tonglen, then it's likely they'll be more aware of the suffering of others and more likely to want to help.

DairyLama

MaryAnne said:

Show me a lay person who 'lives the Dharma' (as best they can) while dealing with spouse, children, work, bills, and other daily responsibilities of community life- and I'll show you someone who really works the Dharma!

We all have such challenges, but they vary according to the lifestyle we have chosen.

MaryAnne

SpinyNorman said:

MaryAnne said:

Show me a lay person who 'lives the Dharma' (as best they can) while dealing with spouse, children, work, bills, and other daily responsibilities of community life- and I'll show you someone who really works the Dharma!

We all have such challenges, but they vary according to the lifestyle we have chosen.

Of course they vary... no one is arguing that point.
However, I think the original line of thinking here was that some of us find no 'admiration' for those whose entire Buddhist 'practice' is enclosed in a bubble of meditation and seclusion... like those monks whose claim to fame is living in a cave for 10 years, or on a mountaintop for decades chanting and meditating. Or the Buddhist lay person who seems totally self-involved in making sure they sit the cushion 4-6 hrs a day in order to 'free themselves from suffering' and find enlightenment, but haven't a clue what kind of suffering is going on right outside their front door. Those were the comparisons I was referring to and agreeing with.

Vastmind

betaboy said:

Vastmind said:

@Jeffrey... I agree with that. I don't believe I was saying different.

I wasn't comparing the engagement...I was calling out those who don't
engage at all. (second part of my post)

what of those who want to engage but cant (due to circumstances, inertia, etc.)?

You can't get blood from a turnip....I'm not asking/talking about people
who can't through no control of their own.....There are a ton of things
I can't do. What CAN you do? Little droplets of water make a mighty
ocean.

I thought we were talking along the lines that MaryAnne described above..

SpinyNorman said:

MaryAnne said:

^^ Aaaah. Gotcha.
And yes, I agree re: "but I also think Buddhism is full
of people who are only worried about their own suffering and liberation.

That hasn't been my experience, if anything the reverse. And if people get involved in Buddhism and start doing practices like metta bhavana and tonglen, then it's likely they'll be more aware of the suffering of others and more likely to want to help.

Good...I'm happy to hear that. I hope it makes people more aware...and yes, it's possible that they will be more likely to want to help.... To be real though.....tonglen doesn't put
food in your belly.....some practices/engagements are excellent for
mental support....once again...I thought we were discussing hands
on engagement and social change stuff....now...I'm confused....I guess
we all mean different things when we say 'engagement' and getting
involved. IMO, Buddhism has been for the middle class here...and they
seem fine with writing a check. Don't get me wrong...checks pay the
bills....but it also adds to the separation and duality that dis-connects
people. IMO. Looking someone in the eyes is harder to do from a
comfty spot. IMO.

It's hard to find volunteers....hard to find people to stick their neck out
for others'....Let's get something started here then.
Just a suggestion. I'm currently getting the projects together now
for our Temple...I'll post it on the Sangha thread, if anyone is interested.

DairyLama

MaryAnne said:

Or the Buddhist lay person who seems totally self-involved in making sure they sit the cushion 4-6 hrs a day in order to 'free themselves from suffering' and find enlightenment, but haven't a clue what kind of suffering is going on right outside their front door.

I can't recall having met anyone like that. I'd suggest also that somebody doing a lot of practice is more likely to be aware of the suffering around them, not less.
Also, somebody coping with the demands of family and work life isn't going to have a lot of energy and time to do voluntary work, so I'm not sure of the point you're making.

cvalue

Many committed Buddhists that I know spend their lives helping others. Only when they reach 70, 80, or 90 years old that they retreat gradually from society to live a secluded life to devote full time to meditation to prepare for their transition from this world to Pure Land. This is my plan too. Until I reach 80 years old, I plan to be active and useful to all humans and animals.

Vastmind

The OP was not just about helping the poor...what about getting involved in the political processes? Any one have thoughts on that?
Changing the laws and bucking the system in the name of helping
others? By the way everyone talks here....the protests and rallies should
be full of Buddhists, hahaha
This week our supreme court is STILL discussing whether state wide
Christian prayer in government meetings should be the norm...also
state voter ID? Just this week LGBT finally got a law passed that they
couldn't be fired....even though they could get married in some states
and could file taxes. In my state alone...TN has racial and LGBT issues...

FYI...getting an SSI check and any benefits are from social change some
people demanded and got passed for the benefit of the people.
Disability? Yep, that too. These programs we hold dear.
In Africa, your shit out of luck. No SSI check....for anything!

MaryAnne

SpinyNorman said:

MaryAnne said:

Or the Buddhist lay person who seems totally self-involved in making sure they sit the cushion 4-6 hrs a day in order to 'free themselves from suffering' and find enlightenment, but haven't a clue what kind of suffering is going on right outside their front door.

I can't recall having met anyone like that. I'd suggest also that somebody doing a lot of practice is more likely to be aware of the suffering around them, not less.
Also, somebody coping with the demands of family and work life isn't going to have a lot of energy and time to do voluntary work, so I'm not sure of the point you're making.

Well, honestly, I don't know anyone like that, in person, myself.
However, I have certainly 'met' many Buddhists exactly like that - on forums like this, chat rooms and blogs who are always espousing the 'need to meditate' for hours a day, and how they (and others) should always keep in mind the goal of enlightenment, etc etc, ad nauseam.
This is when Buddhism easily becomes a crutch of seclusion and self-absorption (IMO). Am I saying there is no point to meditation and spiritual goals for oneself? NO. I'm not saying that... I'm just saying there is a middle path, and too many people who claim to be 'devout' seem to be missing it. Again, YMMV.

MaryAnne

"Also, somebody coping with the demands of family and work life isn't going to have a lot of energy and time to do voluntary work, so I'm not sure of the point you're making."

You are sort of mixing the two points... I said people who live the Dharma while surviving in a work-a-day world raising a family, paying bills, having responsibilities etc, are really living the Dharma - and it's HARD. But it can be done and it has a positive affect on everyone around those people...

Someone sitting in a freakin' cave in the wilderness meditating and chanting doesn't have anything else to really 'challenge' his living the Dharma.... and who does it help, besides himself? No one really.

I wasn't including volunteering or charity work in either scenario

Vastmind

@SpinyNorman
Job and family? Check. Got that. I work for Uncle Sam.
Hubby works out of town. No family help here. I also attend
temple and have started regular
trips to the monastery.
I take my children. How else would they learn?
My 17 yr old is now doing it on her own. 4-5 days
a month. My youngest two are already running fundraisers.

Look, I'm not trying to showboat here...but...
'Isn't going to have alot of energy'?.....

It's about setting priorities.....
or about remaining comfty.....

Jeffrey

@MaryAnne :

"Also, somebody coping with the demands of family and work life isn't going to have a lot of energy and time to do voluntary work, so I'm not sure of the point you're making."

You are sort of mixing the two points... I said people who live the Dharma while surviving in a work-a-day world raising a family, paying bills, having responsibilities etc, are really living the Dharma - and it's HARD. But it can be done and it has a positive affect on everyone around those people...

Someone sitting in a freakin' cave in the wilderness meditating and chanting doesn't have anything else to really 'challenge' his living the Dharma.... and who does it help, besides himself? No one really.

Why judge someone who is in a cave? Release from suffering is the highest goal. Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. As I have already said twice there are multiple ways to be generous: materials, fearlessness, and dharma teachings.

The diamond sutra:

"Subhuti, I will declare a truth to you. If a good man or a good woman filled over ten thousand galaxies of worlds with the seven treasures for each grain of sand in all those Ganges rivers, and gave it all away for the purpose of compassion, charity and giving alms, would this man or woman not gain great merit and spread much happiness?"

Subhuti replied, "Very much so, Most Honored One."

"Subhuti, if after studying and observing even a single stanza of this Sutra, another person were to explain it to others, the happiness and merit that would result from this virtuous act would be far greater."

Being enlightened develops all of the skillful qualities of mind. Generosity is one of the paramitas of the Mahayana. There is no inherent barrier for students to refrain from helping others. The sangha is about dharma teachings and humanitarian aid is not prioritized. Instead the students find their causes on their own. The sangha works on the students heart and then if the (awakening) heart is illuminated it will send rays of compassion to other beings. The rays are the first five paramitas: generosity, ethics, patience, forbearance, joyful energy, and samadhi/concentration. The sun is the wisdom of emptiness to rid one of the afflictions of body/form, feeling (judging good/bad neutral), perception, sankhara/will/formations, and consciousness (5 senses and mind)

I don't think you are wrong @MaryAnne. Actually what you are saying is distorted aspirational bodhicitta of the bodhisattva path. We cannot be happy unless all beings are happy. I just don't think you understand the reason for living in a cave. Just think of it as they are becoming a dharma super hero (where's @lobster to explain this).. and going in the cave makes you have stronger dharma powers to give mindtraining to beings.

Giving a fish is not enough. We vow to save all beings from birth and death.

MaryAnne

@Jeffrey

I'm not exactly 'judging' someone who sits in a cave and meditates for 10 yrs.
I'm evaluating the 'good' that it does for society or the world at large compared to someone who is out there, amongst people, living the Dharma, helping others and setting examples. IMO, one (the cave dweller) is a very self-centered endeavor, and the other much less so.

You said: " Actually what you are saying is distorted aspirational bodhicitta of the bodhisattva path."

Actually, I don't subscribe to the paths or traditions of Buddhism that 'mystifies' certain (questionably acceptable) behaviors as more spiritual than others. I'm a secular Buddhist, not concerned with religious callings, rewards or awards offered to the spiritually devout or 'elite' amongst Buddhists.

I'm not claiming that's all either right or wrong, only that it's not part of my practical vision of the worldly 'good' Buddhism can do.

Now if the cave dweller comes out of the cave and spends the rest of his life actually doing things for people, in his community and for society... that's a different story. But too often they remain secluded, behind temple walls, or within their own walls, all wrapped up in avoiding the world around them in order to "maintain" that inner peace, etc.

::: shrugs :::

Jeffrey

Ok. Then: i SEE your compassionate secular practice as distorted aspirational bodhicitta.

I don't understand why liberation from suffering is not a good thing? It is also good from society as mind training develops all the good qualities and removes the 3 poisons (greed, anger, and delusion). How are you going to be of help in the community if you are greedy, angry, and deluded? You missed my points about mind training helping good works. The man/woman who has conquered their own minds has more power to help other beings rather than less.

Oh and you are judging the cave dweller as selfish.

MaryAnne

Once again, you are using the word selfish, not me. I'm just saying how I observe and understand it. I'm not judging. I'm comparing the RESULTS of these two types of actions from two types of Buddhists.
I have much more admiration for the one who goes out and teaches the Dharma through good works and example, and little admiration for the Buddhist who sits the cushion behind closed doors and does nothing else.
More admiration for one, does not necessarily mean disdain or judgment for the other.

Because I choose chocolate over peanut butter, doesn't mean I 'hate' peanut butter.

Jeffrey

If one is a bodhisattva their aspiration is very vast. Imagine all of these qualities in one person as reflected in the bodhisattva vows. This should refute that the highly developed being can give great benefit to the community.

46 secondary downfalls:

The Forty-Six Secondary Downfalls

1. not making offerings every day to the Three Jewels

2. acting out of desire because of discontent

3. not paying respect to those senior in ordination and in taking the Bodhisattva vows

4. not answering others’ questions out of negligence though one is capable of doing so

5. selfishly not accepting invitations due to pride, the wish to hurt other’s feelings or anger or laziness

6. not accepting others’ gift out of jealousy, anger etc or simply to hurt others

7. not giving the Dharma teaching to those who wish to learn

8. ignoring and insulting someone who has committed any of the five heinous crimes or defiled his or her vows of individual liberation, or treating him or her with contempt

9. not observing the precepts of moral conduct because one wishes to ingratiate oneself with others

10. complying with the minor precepts when the situation demands one's disregard of them for the better benefit of others

11. not committing one of the seven negative actions of body, speech and mind when universal love and compassion deem it necessary in the particular instance

12. accepting things that are acquired through one of the five wrong livelihoods

13. wasting time on frivolous actions such as carelessness, lack of pure morality, dancing, playing music just for fun, gossiping and also distracting others in meditation

14. misconceiving that bodhisattvas do not attempt to attain liberation and failing to view delusions as things to be eliminated

15. not living up to one's precepts

16. not correcting others who are motivated by delusions

17. parting from the four noble disciplines

18. neglecting those who are angry with you

19. refusing to accept the apologies of others

20. acting out thoughts of anger

21. gathering circles of disciples out of desire for respect and material gain

22. wasting time and energy on trivial matters

23. being addicted to frivolous talk

24. not seeking the means to develop concentration

25. not abandoning the five obscurations which hinder meditative stabilisations

26. being addicted to the joy of meditative absorbtion

27. abandoning the path of Theravada as unnecessary for one following the Mahayana

28. exerting effort principally in another system of practice while neglecting the Mahayana teachings that one already has

29. without good reason exerting effort to learn or practise the treaties of non-Buddhists which are not the proper object of one's endeavour

30. beginning to favour and take delight in the treaties of non-Buddhists although studying them for a good reason

31. abandoning any part of the Mahayana by thinking it is uninteresting or unpleasant

32. praising oneself and belittling others because of pride and anger

33. not going to Dharma gatherings or teachings

34. disparaging the spiritual master

35. not helping those who are in need

36. not helping people who are sick

37. not alleviating the suffering of others

38. not explaining what is the proper conduct to those who are reckless

39. not benefiting in return those who have benefited oneself

40 not relieving the sorrow of others

41. not giving material possessions to those in need

42. not working for the welfare of one’s circles of friends, students, employees, helpers

43. not acting in accordance with the wishes of others if doing so does not bring harm to oneself or others

44. not praising those who have good qualities

45. not acting with whatever means are necessary according to the circumstances to stop someone who is doing harmful action

46. not using miraculous powers, if one possesses this ability, in order to stop others from doing unwholesome actions

MaryAnne

Jeffrey, love, with all due respect and no lack of gentleness--
you are thumping the Buddhist Book at someone who doesn't believe in the religious/magical-thinking aspect of Buddhism.
You may as well be thumping the Torah or the Bible for all the good it will do to change my mind!

Jeffrey

MaryAnne said:

Once again, you are using the word selfish, not me. I'm just saying how I observe and understand it. I'm not judging. I'm comparing the RESULTS of these two types of actions from two types of Buddhists.
I have much more admiration for the one who goes out and teaches the Dharma through good works and example, and little admiration for the Buddhist who sits the cushion behind closed doors and does nothing else.
More admiration for one, does not necessarily mean disdain or judgment for the other.

Because I choose chocolate over peanut butter, doesn't mean I 'hate' peanut butter.

I agree then. I don't have the hubris to tell you what type of Buddhist to love. I was just thinking you were slamming 'lazy' 'selfish' yogis. You must agree that edit:self-centered is a critical word. Also I made a point that wisdom of emptiness goes hand in hand with generosity. The two wings of a being in Mahayana are compassion and wisdom. If there is wisdom without compassion then there is not wisdom. And vice versa! If there is compassion with no wisdom there is no compassion. An example in my life was when I had an alcoholic down and out girl friend. I bought her cigarettes and alcohol everyday because I thought she needed them. Then when I eventually left her (because I couldn't handle her), she eventually hit bottom and went to recovery. So I had great love for her, but I wasn't helping her other than the good feeling of having a friend.

Most of the bodhisattva vows I bolded the number on are NOT mystical.

Jeffrey

@MaryAnne, what parts of Buddhism do attract you? I am asking because if a yogi is self-centered then doesn't that invalidate the teachings in the sutras which are our record of Buddhism. Buddha gave a path including meditaton that he says leads to liberation rather than 'self-centered', didn't he? Self liberation was a mind realization rather than a result of volunteering or whatever you try to do.