Buddhist traditions-Does this ring true? or are these red flags?
I’ve started early steps in a Buddhist tradition. I am loving a great deal of it, this being my first exposure to Buddhism. But… I’m looking for some guidance because despite the fabulous stuff my ‘might this be a cult?’ radar is nagging me.
POSITIVES?
*Lovely warm sincere people.
*The logic of the teachings makes it cut thru and accessible to my western analytical mind (the same logical mind that is now troubling me)
*A range of courses, study programmes etc, which I don’t mind paying for.
*A warm caring sangha feel to it all
*Already after 5-6 months I’ve learnt a great deal and am changing within in many of the ways I’d like to as I gain more insights-I’m excited for the future
ISSUES? - But are the following aspects common to your tradition? They are red flags to me.
*The founder is seen as the source of pretty much everything-all books, sadhanas-99% of things I've seen are authored by the founder-he's quoted constantly, in very warm terms-like he's the protector & standard-bearer of the 'one true way'.
*Whilst its not compulsory to have the founder as your Spiritual Guide, its pretty much assumed, as if why would you have anyone else? I'll never meet him- he lives on the other side of the world, quite elderly
*Overseas Festivals & events are promoted as virtually ‘must-dos’, as if without attending them you’ll not be able to gain enlightenment or at the very least the progress you’d like.
*The local teaching monk has, unsolicited, criticised, in several public sessions in veiled terms, another prominent international Buddhist leader as if ‘we’ are being discriminated against, harshly treated as if it’s us against the world. I couldn’t care less-it’s not my fight-why is it even raised at general teachings?
*If I’ve googled this Tradition, the web is full of stories from disaffected ex members. Googling other traditions only results in a tiny fraction of such stories online
Don't worry about the name of the tradition, they could be called ACME Buddhist Tradition for this example- its the 'issues' aspect that I'm asking for some ideas on. As an example, Scientology has many of those types of issues, which is why it's seen as a cult (and possibly a dangerous one). Why should a Buddhist tradition be viewed any less objectively?
Do these 'issues' exist in your Buddhist tradition?
Comments
Forms of Buddhism that have gurus are going to match a lot of what you've said, but that's how those forms of Buddhism work. There are others to choose from, or you can try to go it alone (not the most recommended method).
They don't exist in mine -- I do not ascribe to a Buddhist tradition though I am most strongly drawn to Theravada and Zen (as if the two could seem more different).
I too get really wary of 'groupthink' and attributing anything but respect to another human being. I mean respect for knowing more than I do, having greater experience than I do, and for having plumbed 'the depths' and traveled the path farther along than I have.
Hey, ACME Buddhist Tradition is what I call my tradition! Crap I ought to have incorporated.
Welcome and pardon a few of us lighthearted ones (thanks for that @anataman, another complement besides the invitation to have your babies in another life). This is also a very serious thing, where you are, and your questions and 'red flags' are very well thought out and, I agree, a bit disturbing.
They do not exist in mine, not the way it is practiced with my teacher within my Sangha at least. Devotion to a guru is very common, but never without questioning first. Questioning of teachers is strongly encouraged and devotion is offered only upon that trust having been developed. There are no requirements whatsoever to travel or do things like that on a checklist to enlightenment.
There are some practitioners/groups who feel very discriminated against based on the words of other teachers/leaders. There is quite a debate online about some of it, but it is not something I know enough about to have an opinion.
At the risk of both repetition and self-promotion, here is a short thing I wrote some years ago about Buddhism for a high-school student whose Christian church encouraged her to branch out, snoop other spiritual paths and learn "tolerance." Whether her visit here ever inspired tolerance I don't know:
The truth of Buddhism does not come from a book. It does not come from a temple. It does not come from someone else. It is not written on a piece of paper. The truth of Buddhism comes from the individual effort to investigate, verify and actualize a clear understanding of this life.
Shakyamuni Buddha, the man most often referred to as the founder of Buddhism, was born on the border of India and Nepal in about 565 BC. He attained what is sometimes called enlightenment at 35 and preached until his death at 80. Many schools of Buddhism sprang from his teachings … in India, Tibet, China, Korea and Japan among others. Uncertain estimates put Buddhist numbers at about 350 million worldwide.
All Buddhist schools agree on at least two things:
The Four Noble Truths are:
*** 1. There is suffering (dukkha – the uncertainties, dissatisfactions and doubts that life can dish up); 2. There is a cause of suffering; 3. There is an end to suffering; 4. There is a way to end suffering.
The Eightfold Path is:
*** 1. Right View 2. Right Intention 3. Right Speech 4. Right Action 5. Right Livelihood 6. Right Effort 7. Right Mindfulness 8. Right Concentration.
The word "right" is sometimes translated as "complete." A “complete” effort is thorough-going and whole-hearted. Nothing is held back. Buddhism is not a threat-based persuasion: You won’t go to heaven (right) if you practice it and you won’t go to hell (wrong) if you don’t. But honesty is required -- complete honesty.
The Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path carry with them the verifiable observation that everything in life changes. There is nothing that does not change. Joy turns to sorrow, love turns to anger, birth turns to death, and the family car always gets a flat. All Buddhist schools agree on such things, but how they approach them may vary.
But as the Dalai Lama put it once, "Everyone wants to be happy." And that is probably as good a summary of Buddhism as any.
I agree with @AldrisTorvalds about 'going it alone', as the sangha is one of the three Jewels and foundational to both newbies and oldies. I once admitted that the members of this forum are one of my sanghas and a few feathers flew but in the end there is potential for more enrichment in a group of the like-minded.
Unless, as your red flags indicate, there's a little too much like-mindedness. Or where like-mindedness gets fossilized or becomes something you'd not step out of 'or else'.
You can also 'take it or leave it' within an imperfect sangha, unless the Stepford Factor is too high. There's no real right or wrong, in other words. The Buddha was not a Buddhist, in fact, some believe he would have denounced the religious trappings Buddhism has accrued over the millenia.
@Hamsaka I kinda go it alone myself, but not out of choice (I'm a non-traditionalist and don't even have any Buddhist sanghas or centers around my area), but I also consider all genuine seekers of truth to be part of my sangha. I'm sure this is in some way detrimental to my practice, and I'd be better off with a teacher that "knows".
Could you write the issues as bullet points? I have trouble in reading comprehension. In traditions with a guru the connection between the lama and student form a blessing that is neccessary to progress. The blessing is called adhistana and the connection is called samaya. The guru basically creates a pure realm in which dharma is the value of the sangha. It starts with the guru at the center but their power, compassion, and wisdom radiates to all the members on the spokes. The samaya is like the spokes. The spokes transmit the center of the wheels power into activity on the edges. The adhistana is a kind of a trust in the guru to make your dharma practice central to your life. Your trust is that however wrong you go the guru is always there to throw or draw you back into Buddhadharma.
For me this is a red flag:
Criticism is one thing but seeing it as us versus them indicates wrong view to me. Are you sure it is not merely criticism to protect the integrity of their own sanghas teachings? For example thanisarro Bhiku criticizes some things in Mahayana Buddhism to show the right way to his students. Meanwhile the Mahayana teachers criticize ideas in the Theravada. It is normal to criticize and not normal to have an us against them dynamic.
Sure. A lot of traditions have a focus on the teacher, with many/most sanghas working with one, or a close-knit group teachers, usually a single senior teacher with a group of subordinate, junior teachers.
I think the term "cult" gets bandied about too liberally. Virtually any group can be viewed as a cult. I was involved with two Christian cults when I was in my late teens. Needless to say, I was circumspect when I started pursuing Buddhist practice. But then, having first-hand knowledge of, and experience with cults, I know exactly what to look for.
What you describe, doesn't seem too close to what I'd call a cult, but if you don't like what you find currently, go out, and find a sangha that you do like.
Sounds like a NKT sangha. True?
POSITIVES?
*Lovely warm sincere people -- in general, no more so than in many other religions.
*The logic of the teachings makes it cut thru and accessible to my western analytical mind (the same logical mind that is now troubling me). -- are all the teachings logical? I don't think so. That's not to say that there are many logical and inspiring teachings, but the original statement is over-reaching.
*A warm caring sangha feel to it all -- well, that's very vague.
*Already after 5-6 months I’ve learnt a great deal and am changing within in many of the ways I’d like to as I gain more insights-I’m excited for the future -- cool. that's the way it should be.
ISSUES?
*The founder is seen as the source of pretty much everything-all books, sadhanas-99% of things I've seen are authored by the founder-he's quoted constantly, in very warm terms-like he's the protector & standard-bearer of the 'one true way'. -- one of the things I've often seen in Thailand -- which I am very opposed to -- is when a particular Buddhist following almost deifies a particular abbot or monk. It's not about that individual. It's about the teachings of Buddha, and there are many teachers who interpret those teachings.
*Whilst its not compulsory to have the founder as your Spiritual Guide, its pretty much assumed, as if why would you have anyone else? I'll never meet him- he lives on the other side of the world, quite elderly -- A monk once told me, "Easy to learn about Buddhist. Buy a book. Difficult to learn about yourself."
*Overseas Festivals & events are promoted as virtually ‘must-dos’, as if without attending them you’ll not be able to gain enlightenment or at the very least the progress you’d like. -- So if you were stranded on a desert island, you couldn't be Buddhist?
*The local teaching monk has, unsolicited, criticised, in several public sessions in veiled terms, another prominent international Buddhist leader as if ‘we’ are being discriminated against, harshly treated as if it’s us against the world. I couldn’t care less-it’s not my fight-why is it even raised at general teachings? -- here again, it seems as if the local teaching monk thinks it's all about him, when it's really not. He could die tomorrow by falling in an open manhole...Buddhism would go on without him very nicely.
Cult eh?
http://www.thenakedmonk.com/2012/09/30/when-buddhism-is-a-cult/
Sure they exist, are flocked to, defended and provide a variety of needs and attachments to be sold as a path . . .
The usual business.
I take it you require discernment and independent thinking? Good luck
:wave: .
I'm sorry to say, @WonderinginAustralia, but actually the tradition you're with at the moment would need identifying.
There are certain sects of Buddhism which have a reputation which at best causes raised eyebrows, and at worst is roundly denounced by others. Whether these criticisms are well-founded or justified is a subjective view, but the fact that you are experiencing disquiet and that your analytical mind is uncomfortable is sufficient reason, in my opinion, for you to be more clear on what the school you're with, is.
I also suspect @Chaz may be correct in his guess.
There is no shame in naming them, here.....
My thought too.
The biggest red flag for me would be the disaffected ex-members. I think that answers your question.
The NKT is a fantastic Dharma organisation...Sure its not been without its problems over the years but its provided a Dharma avenue for many people.
The 3 Sets of teachings taught are the essence of Buddha's entire teachings.
Lamrim, Lojong and Mahamudra.
None of which will matter to a newcomer. Most newcomers to Buddhism haven't the faintest idea about Lamrim, Lojong and Mahamudra and won't care. Their interests and concerns lie elsewhere.
And virtually all snghas will have disaffected ex-members.
I'm sure they do. I was responding to this in the OP:
All religions have their disaffected, and buddhism has it's fair share - just look at what's out there. The fact is hey didn't get the change in view they desired and it frustrates and upsets them, and they can't see the problem is themselves. Hence they reside on the bhavachakra as Naraka's, Asura's and Preta's... But this is an oversimplification.
Obviously. But what the disaffected are disaffected about is important information.
When I buy something (including books or ideas) I always read the bad ratings if they are available. To me it's pretty clear when a person is just pissed that their ego wasn't stroked versus a genuine description of 'fail'.
Disaffection can be very educational, and I've made purchases with greater confidence based upon the metamessage I've discerned from the low ratings
.
Could also be SGI... I think I echoed a lot of those sentiments at one point during my course with them.
@WonderinginAustralia Like I said, I've been in a similar situation and the solution I reached was that even though it wasn't wholly bad and I did learn/change a lot... I didn't want to constantly have to have that little niggling feeling in the back of my mind. I wanted a sangha I could really get behind 100% and not have to constantly feel bad that I wasn't as gung-ho as the others because I couldn't turn off that little danger alarm. Listen to how you feel and know that it is okay to feel whatever it is you're feeling! You don't have to rationalize your gut feelings. Just do what you feel is best.
Hi @WonderinginAustralia. Nice to see another Aussie on board!
I was involved with the NKT here in Melbourne a few years ago for a while. They seemed like a good bunch of people and I never experienced anything that made me doubt their sincerity.
I too had exactly the same concerns that you've raised above but, apart from a minor argument with a nun who criticised someone for not believing in rebirth, I had no problems at all.
Was their self promotion and marketing a little slick? Maybe. However they are promoting "modern" Buddhism so I guess you could argue they're just keeping up with the times.
Also, I have a work colleague who I like and respect a lot and she has been heavily involved with them (she travels overseas to the festivals etc) for around ten years and has nothing but good things to say.
I only stopped going because I wanted to explore other avenues before making a real commitment. In fact, I am in the city today so I might pop into their centre for a look.
Anyway, that's my two bobs worth. Send me a PM if you'd like to discuss further privately.
Good luck!
OP, I don't understand how the sangha can expect members to attend overseas events. That would entail financial hardship for some. I think that at which point you start feeling pressure to do anything you're not comfortable doing, that would be when you chose to either look for another group, or study on your own at home, which is a perfectly valid path. And we're here to help with that.
.
The victim mentality you describe at the end, and introducing a sense of conflict into the sangha, sounds a bit samsaric, doesn't it? That would work at cross-purposes to the goal of helping students reach enlightenment.
I think it's great that you've learned a lot. Why not stick with it until you have reason not to? Don't relinquish your faculty of discernment; it will serve you well in keeping you out of trouble.
@WonderinginAustralia has only put in one appearance -which is perfctly fine 0- but in order to not let this thread 'run away with itself' and accumulate countless posts and variants on a theme, I shall temporarily close it, until the OP can make a return.
@WonderinginAustralia, feel free to send me a PM when you make it back and I will gladly re-open the thread.
Thanks to all who contributed.