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.
Okay. What if the entirety of the USA has buddha nature? It certainly does. Despite the inequality of wealth, racism, misogyny, xenophobia, public and police brutality, narcississm, rape, murder, insatiable greed, fundamentalism, the media, social media, unquenchable lust, politicians, pharmaceutical companies, big oil companies, prisons, gangs, just to mention a few of the obstacles to overcome, one would never suspect a buddha nature to be squeezed in there. But it is. After his enlightenment, the Buddha was in two minds about teaching the Dharma because it's so profound. He mightn't have uttered a peep had he become awakened in 21st century America. Yet there it is. Americans dwell in a beautiful catastrophe with the wherewithal to awaken to buddha nature ~ if ten million things don't get in the way first, or if they can just make some spare time to get mindful. Not sure there is even the capacity on a wide scale to grasp the subtlety of what a buddha nature even is, much less its emptiness. But its there. Maybe Mettayya Buddha could do it. A North American Rocker
Mettayya Buddha this time. How many maha kappas would that take? The presence of buddha nature in America is likely as close as we'll come to a preponderance of Buddhists in the USA for eons. So we're all Buddhists here in the States, we just may not know it (and won't for eons) yet. Present almost-enlightened company excluded, of course.
JeroenLuminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlandsVeteran
@grackle said:
America I believe will not be bettered by anything except a closer following of and respect for the Declaration and Constitution. Our most pressing need is for patriots who know much self sacrifice is still needed to become the guiding light we were meant to be.
There is a certain truth in that. Western nations together have a certain heritage, which includes the separation of church and state, some measure of a grip on corruption, constitutional democracy and human rights. Some of these things have been exported to the rest of the world, others not. It would be interesting to see a more Buddhist America, or any western state, but I think it would remain part of a panoply of religious faiths.
A more important problem is how we deal with big money and capitalism. Money, how to spend it, how to get elected, how to lobby for budget, seems to have overtaken politics to the point where much of the real work is obscured. I'd like to see more countries follow Bhutan's example and start paying attention to the happiness of citizens.
@Kerome Bhutan still has numerous problems itself. They tout their happiness scale, and I think it is a great thing to consider. But they also admit they have a big problem with poverty and employment, heath care and education. Half of their citizens have never been to school and cannot read and living in heavy poverty leaves them exposed to numerous health problems. It is all connected, and they do not have the resources to expand the fixes of those problems to their whole nation.
One of the directors of the office that tracks their happiness scale said this:
“Despite the positive publicity for Bhutan in the course of spreading GNH, we have sent out a wrong message and as a result, most of the outside world wrongly thinks we are the happiest country in the world,” she explained.
2
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
edited April 2016
Why stop at the U.S? There is a whole world to conquor!
Just kidding.
I'd like to see the world awaken but I don't know if that would mean everybody would have to be Buddhist.
Because of Buddhist values as I see them, our interconnectedness is easier seen through diversity of views rather than conversion.
We would have to do it like a sneaky mom hiding ground veggies in the cake. Add a sprinkle of Buddhist wisdom to everything without calling it Buddhism and suddenly a jealous God type being makes no sense to people.
@David said:
Why stop at the U.S? There is a whole world to conquor!
Just kidding.
I'd like to see the world awaken but I don't know if that would mean everybody would have to be Buddhist.
Because of Buddhist values as I see them, our interconnectedness is easier seen through diversity of views rather than conversion.
We would have to do it like a sneaky mom hiding ground veggies in the cake.
Or simply just focus on young people. The people who would be most resistant would then just eventually enter their next lives.
1
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
@David said:
Why stop at the U.S? There is a whole world to conquor!
Just kidding.
I'd like to see the world awaken but I don't know if that would mean everybody would have to be Buddhist.
Because of Buddhist values as I see them, our interconnectedness is easier seen through diversity of views rather than conversion.
We would have to do it like a sneaky mom hiding ground veggies in the cake.
Or simply just focus on young people. The people who would be most resistant would then just eventually enter their next lives.
It really depends on what you mean here. Teaching children how to think is different than teaching them what to think and the former is much more conducive to the Buddhist process than the latter.
More smart kids. Less Buddhist/Christian/indoctrinated muppets. Sounds like a master plan ...
0
JeroenLuminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlandsVeteran
There is obviously a terrible shortage of Buddhist video games, we are not reaching the younger generation and they are growing up immersed in guns, swords and dragons.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
That's probably a comment laced with ironic humour, but it does prompt thought:
If technological influence is in part responsible for the behaviour and attitude of people today - what can be done to either restore a more constructive, positive and socially-responsible mindset, through its use - or without?
There are actually some decent games that are walking simulators that I find fit quite well with Buddhism, no violence involved. They are somewhat like Choose Your Own Adventure books made into games. I quite enjoy them. But they have no action and kids don't enjoy that very much. I don't think you will get kids interested unless the game has action (which doesn't have to mean violence).
It is up to each person to control how they use themselves in the tech/social media world. It is quite possible to use social media without falling into the crap that exists on it. I am in a couple of groups on FB that are wonderful, there are none of the typical comments and idiocy you usually see. There is plenty of it out there, I just chose not to immerse myself in it and engage with people who participate in it. Even when my friends post the crap, I just don't comment. There's no reason for me to. I'm not going to "school" them on anything. It doesn't help them, it doesn't help me, and it has the potential to harm us both. So I just don't go there.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited April 2016
That wasn't my question.
I know you pretty much have it all worked out for yourself. @karasti.
My question was about the general techno-socially-connected public in general...
ETA: That wasn't sarcasm, btw... I'm being honest - you DO pretty much have it all worked out!
1
JeroenLuminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlandsVeteran
In some ways the fast lane of life has gotten a lot faster. Gone are the days of jet-setting, now if you are not webcasting a vlog every day and connection to a hundred thousand Twitter followers you're not part of the "in crowd". This has a few implications, both for creators and consumers. But it is mostly in the realm of communication - it doesn't change the skilful or unskillful nature of what you say. You can choose to share skillfuly, like skillfuly, to influence the behaviour of a group.
Perhaps in the future we will see projects to bring greater social awareness to groups - for example allowing people to input their giving behaviour, or aggregate spending on alcohol, or car sharing miles. Then you could project consequences, and see "this group that I am a member of has saved X tonnes of CO2 emitted" and be inspired, aware of what you could do to contribute to changing behaviour on the group level.
But I think most of all one should be aware of places that foster a sense of online community. Things like a newspaper are not, things like a mental health forum which shares academic papers are. If we all do what we can to make those places better and more involved, then we can fill the Internet with worthwhile communities. Be a good citizen, and encourage others to do likewise.
This extends to how you architect a site. If you provide opportunities for people to share worthwhile things and encourage doing good things for each other, you can guide people into good behaviour.
It's an interesting area... Bears further thought...
@federica LOL I wish I had it all figured out! I have a hard time balancing when I need to get rid of a group or even an online friend and when I should keep them because we both need the lessons. That balance is hard to find. I have to look at if I am leaving/unfriending/hiding/whatever because of my discomfort and then look what happens if I surround myself only with those who are like me.
I just try not to stick myself into the craziness that happens online like I used to. I don't comment on articles just to poke people who I disagree with, nor with the idea that I can change their minds. I have a good friend who, when she has PMS or is otherwise feeling cranky, she specifically goes to sites she disagrees with (like anti-vaxxers) and trolls them because she's feeling bitchy. I don't get that, and learning more about that side of her has made me question if I've really known her all these years. If I'm not sure that what I want to say will be harmful or helpful, then I don't say it, I guess.
@karasti
I have a good friend who, when she has PMS or is otherwise feeling cranky, she specifically goes to sites she disagrees with (like anti-vaxxers) and trolls them because she's feeling bitchy.
I can totally get that. It's almost like an itch that needs to be scratched. Is there any such thing as a male PMS?
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@Swaroop said: @karasti
I have a good friend who, when she has PMS or is otherwise feeling cranky, she specifically goes to sites she disagrees with (like anti-vaxxers) and trolls them because she's feeling bitchy.
I can totally get that. It's almost like an itch that needs to be scratched. Is there any such thing as a male PMS?
Ah. That old joke.
"If men had PMS - who'd notice?"
@Kerome ahh, but you'll find questionable things in the HHDL's rule as well, if you look for them. His strong wording/ban of Dorje Shugden, for example. The history of slaves in his palaces as well. Thailand has one of the more corrupt political and justice systems out there. They are bursting with Buddhism. And what to make of the Buddhist monk Ashin Wirathu and his followers in Myanmar/Burma?
1
JeroenLuminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlandsVeteran
The problem is, as soon as you let monks have power, those who desire power will come to the monkhood. I suspect the Buddha's solution, of monks as wandering beggars spreading the dharma, is not so bad, all things considered.
@karasti said: @Kerome ahh, but you'll find questionable things in the HHDL's rule as well, if you look for them. His strong wording/ban of Dorje Shugden, for example. The history of slaves in his palaces as well. Thailand has one of the more corrupt political and justice systems out there. They are bursting with Buddhism. And what to make of the Buddhist monk Ashin Wirathu and his followers in Myanmar/Burma?
We should go full-on Buddhist theodemocracy.
@federica said:
Ah. That old joke.
"If men had PMS - who'd notice?"
Marilyn Monroe? Amy Winehouse? Some truths are better left unrealized.
Adoption of Buddhist values by the majority of people rather than conversion may be a option. Institutionalised religion has its own undesirable side effects.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@federica said:
I don't understand the connection...
Lots of experience with men—and suicide.
Point being?
Some truths are better left unrealized.
@Swaroop said:
Adoption of Buddhist values by the majority of people rather than conversion may be a option.
That's a very passive approach and one that ultimately undermines change.
Institutionalised religion has its own undesirable side effects.
I just don't see it that way. Not only do people tend to find a new outlet for their religious tendencies once they've abandoned religion, but they also tend to find new organizations and causes to latch onto once they've left an organization or institution.
Your assertion here also sort of reminds me of the tangents practicing Buddhists who grew up in the Cold War era will go into about their disdain for religion, even though they're actively practicing one. Lol. Times change.
0
JeroenLuminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlandsVeteran
One could take several approaches to that. Perhaps a society which had separation of church and state but sufficiently advanced and non-attached citizens might give rise to a new politics. Or perhaps we need a ground-up religious Neo Buddhist organisation which is state sponsored to teach everyone the contents of their mind from a young age.
Somehow the second sounds a little dystopian, not sure I would like that future.
@MX_83 A lot of people who practice Buddhism consider it more of a philosophy than a religion. There are quite a few people who limit the definition and their understanding of religion as theistic. God/Gods are almost always wrapped up in definitions of religion, which is usually what people are referring to if they seem to be suggesting otherwise.
I don't see much difference in the difficulties faced by a country or it's joe average citizenry.
Both would rather blame external circumstances as the cause of their difficulties rather than being willing to face and address their own personal ignorance's.
A tribe of one or a tribe of millions are just different colors of the same delusion.
Is the windmill deluded or....... the white Buddhist knight charging at it?
This world is an ever changing expression of dukkha to journey through.
Can you address it's expression of Dukkha any more effectively than you can your own?
Are they any different?
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
Hmm.
A not-so-passive conversion method to Buddhism...
That sounds like conformity.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@Swaroop said:
Adoption of Buddhist values by the majority of people rather than conversion may be a option.
That's a very passive approach and one that ultimately undermines change.
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
@federica said:
I don't understand the connection...
Lots of experience with men—and suicide.
Sorry, that's a bit of a stretch - from 'a bit cranky' to men and suicide.
Point being?
Some truths are better left unrealized.
I disagree.
No doubt the full reality of male PMS jumped out at them like the Hounds of Tindalos from the spaces between dimensions.
@karasti said: @MX_83 A lot of people who practice Buddhism consider it more of a philosophy than a religion. There are quite a few people who limit the definition and their understanding of religion as theistic. God/Gods are almost always wrapped up in definitions of religion, which is usually what people are referring to if they seem to be suggesting otherwise.
I don't think ethnic Buddhists see it this way. I understand that this view is somewhat common in the West because it was deliberately propagated that way, but I still can't get over the sense that you're being a bit of a Projecty McPsychologicalprojectorface.
@person said:
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
Then let's not be superficial!
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
I can easily imagine a world where none of the above happens, and Buddhadharma become just another religious metaphor holding great truths whose insights are the sole purview of academics as a device for their obscure musings. And securing grants from whoever is in power.
@Kerome said:
One could take several approaches to that. Perhaps a society which had separation of church and state but sufficiently advanced and non-attached citizens might give rise to a new politics. Or perhaps we need a ground-up religious Neo Buddhist organisation which is state sponsored to teach everyone the contents of their mind from a young age.
Somehow the second sounds a little dystopian, not sure I would like that future.
If you went to sleep tonight and woke up in Antarctica only to learn that you had been placed in suspended animation for 100 years, and you had to choose between living either in a hybrid democracy and Buddhist theocracy or somewhere in a huge Islamic caliphate, which offer would you take?
@how said:
Is the windmill deluded or....... the white Buddhist knight charging at it?
Is the finger pointing to the moon deluded or the crew of jackasses who strap themselves atop a controlled explosion so they can walk on it? I find that, ultimately, such dichotomies are false.
@MX_83 I wasn't talking about ethnic Buddhists, I was only responding to your comment about people who practice Buddhism but mock religion as a whole. There's a reason they do that. Anyhow, it's obvious you have zero interest in entertaining any views other than your own, so I'm done here. When you respond to everything everyone says with "But...your'e wrong" you aren't being open to the discussion and learning from different views. You only want people to see why you think you are right.
@karasti said: @MX_83 When you respond to everything everyone says with "But...your'e wrong" you aren't being open to the discussion and learning from different views. You only want people to see why you think you are right.
I don't agree with you about this, but I can certainly agree to disagree.
Ultimately, I realize that you disagree with most of what I've said or proposed, and I understand that your perspective is very different from mine, and I value that. However, overall I don't really find what you're saying to be compelling. I'm not required to agree with you anymore than you're required to agree with me. I've still learned from this exchange, however. I think I've learned a bit more about who I should try the hardest to reach and who I should simply let be.
Regarding Buddhist practitioners in the West, I'm not entirely sure that the "Buddhism as philosophy" expedient is still as popular as it once was, and I'm doubtful that it will be as influential in the future. My view is that others would be better served by coming to the Buddhadharma with the same earnestness as the ethnic Buddhists do. Maybe even more earnestly.
@person said:
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
Awesome comment. I wish I had said that.
A religion devoid of name, practiced in a country free of allegiance.
I'll join.
'Christ be with you' as we X-Buddhists from the United (inner) States say ...
@person said:
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
Awesome comment. I wish I had said that.
A religion devoid of name, practiced in a country free of allegiance.
I'll join.
'Christ be with you' as we X-Buddhists from the United (inner) States say ...
Frankly, I'm not entirely sure what motivates some of you space-aliens of Western Buddhists. It's as if you're saying, "I love riding bikes, I just don't like 'handles,'" so to speak. I just can't identify with your perspective here, for a number of reasons. It's kind of like... Why did you become Buddhist in the first place?
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
@person said:
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
Then let's not be superficial!
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
I can easily imagine a world where none of the above happens, and Buddhadharma become just another religious metaphor holding great truths whose insights are the sole purview of academics as a device for their obscure musings. And securing grants from whoever is in power.
You're missing the point. There are lots of different worlds that can be imagined, I was using these two to illustrate the point about what is the important thing to change, namely inner qualities and not just religion. As you say we could imagine a country of all Buddhists that aren't superficial, but that kind of proves my point about the important thing is the inner change and not the outer form of religion.
@person said:
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
Awesome comment. I wish I had said that.
A religion devoid of name, practiced in a country free of allegiance.
I'll join.
'Christ be with you' as we X-Buddhists from the United (inner) States say ...
Frankly, I'm not entirely sure what motivates some of you space-aliens of Western Buddhists. It's as if you're saying, "I love riding bikes, I just don't like 'handles,'" so to speak. I just can't identify with your perspective here, for a number of reasons. It's kind of like... Why did you become Buddhist in the first place?
Usually its to reduce our suffering or become better people or some such thing, not so we can have the label of Buddhist or participate in Buddhist ritual.
@person said:
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
Then let's not be superficial!
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
I can easily imagine a world where none of the above happens, and Buddhadharma become just another religious metaphor holding great truths whose insights are the sole purview of academics as a device for their obscure musings. And securing grants from whoever is in power.
You're missing the point. There are lots of different worlds that can be imagined, I was using these two to illustrate the point about what is the important thing to change, namely inner qualities and not just religion. As you say we could imagine a country of all Buddhists that aren't superficial, but that kind of proves my point about the important thing is the inner change and not the outer form of religion.
@person said:
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
Awesome comment. I wish I had said that.
A religion devoid of name, practiced in a country free of allegiance.
I'll join.
'Christ be with you' as we X-Buddhists from the United (inner) States say ...
Frankly, I'm not entirely sure what motivates some of you space-aliens of Western Buddhists. It's as if you're saying, "I love riding bikes, I just don't like 'handles,'" so to speak. I just can't identify with your perspective here, for a number of reasons. It's kind of like... Why did you become Buddhist in the first place?
Usually its to reduce our suffering or become better people or some such thing, not so we can have the label of Buddhist or participate in Buddhist ritual.
I think it's just the opposite—that rather, you have missed my point, and I suspect that the root of this breakdown in communication has to do with deeply embedded assumptions stemming from us having disparate respective worldviews. (Or so experience has taught me.) Furthermore, out of the infinity of worlds that could be imagined, some are more probable than others, and while I am in no way contesting that substance should be valued over empty form, sometimes propagating the form is a good way to encourage the substance. Every problem looks like a nail when you have a hammer, and perhaps many, who otherwise would not have, can attain a significant and influential degree of awakening if they are brought into the Buddhadharma.
This is a significant aspect of what I'm proposing. What mystifies me is why so many here are resistant to the idea, and why they view the objections they have to it as being valid to the degree that they assume. Maybe you guys are a little WEIRD (Western Educated Industrialized Rich Democratic)?
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
@person said:
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
Then let's not be superficial!
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
I can easily imagine a world where none of the above happens, and Buddhadharma become just another religious metaphor holding great truths whose insights are the sole purview of academics as a device for their obscure musings. And securing grants from whoever is in power.
You're missing the point. There are lots of different worlds that can be imagined, I was using these two to illustrate the point about what is the important thing to change, namely inner qualities and not just religion. As you say we could imagine a country of all Buddhists that aren't superficial, but that kind of proves my point about the important thing is the inner change and not the outer form of religion.
@person said:
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
Awesome comment. I wish I had said that.
A religion devoid of name, practiced in a country free of allegiance.
I'll join.
'Christ be with you' as we X-Buddhists from the United (inner) States say ...
Frankly, I'm not entirely sure what motivates some of you space-aliens of Western Buddhists. It's as if you're saying, "I love riding bikes, I just don't like 'handles,'" so to speak. I just can't identify with your perspective here, for a number of reasons. It's kind of like... Why did you become Buddhist in the first place?
Usually its to reduce our suffering or become better people or some such thing, not so we can have the label of Buddhist or participate in Buddhist ritual.
I think it's just the opposite—that rather, you have missed my point, and I suspect that the root of this breakdown in communication has to do with deeply embedded assumptions stemming from us having disparate respective worldviews. (Or so experience has taught me.) Furthermore, out of the infinity of worlds that could be imagined, some are more probable than others, and while I am in no way contesting that substance should be valued over empty form, sometimes propagating the form is a good way to encourage the substance. Every problem looks like a nail when you have a hammer, and perhaps many, who otherwise would not have, can attain a significant and influential degree of awakening if they are brought into the Buddhadharma.
This is a significant aspect of what I'm proposing. What mystifies me is why so many here are resistant to the idea, and why they view the objections they have to it as being valid to the degree that they assume. Maybe you guys are a little WEIRD (Western Educated Industrialized Rich Democratic)?
I think maybe its an issue of practicality. Conversion of the US into an all Buddhist country is totally impossible, it would take the threat of government, or aliens or some other powerful force, forcing conversion at the end of a gun and killing those who would rather die than give up their beliefs.
A vision where everyone decided in their own right to convert and wholeheartedly embraced Buddhism would indeed make a better country, but lets be real here.
I'm all for efforts that expand Buddhist outreach, increasing opportunities for others to encounter and benefit from the teachings but not efforts aimed at converting people, which assumes some level of persuasion. They have to come to it of their own accord.
And what if they became Buddhists? Then someone might say 'what if they became Buddhists of my sect? (and not those 'others')'
2
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
edited April 2016
@Jeffrey said:
And what if they became Buddhists? Then someone might say 'what if they became Buddhists of my sect? (and not those 'others')'
Jeffrey that reminds me of this story:
Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"
He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"
He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"
Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.
6
JeroenLuminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlandsVeteran
@MX_83 said:
...while I am in no way contesting that substance should be valued over empty form, sometimes propagating the form is a good way to encourage the substance.
I think this is a view often held by those lacking in rigour, but in fact it opens the door for falsification of substance under the guise of form. Hence I am not a fan.
The resistance that you seem to be noticing is probably due to the hard-won western attitude towards religion, that it should be separate from the state and not allowed to interfere, and that people should be free to choose their own religion. If you had spent two thousand years arguing this point with a procession of Popes, you would be reluctant to abandon it too!
That said, I think many parts of Buddhism are highly beneficial to the development of a more enlightened humanity. I would like to see it spread and develop. On the other hand, there are parts that are archaic and less than useful - the Buddhist cosmology seems very dubious, and Buddha worship a bit contrary to the whole doctrine of enlightenment, whatever justifications are made for it.
4
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited April 2016
@MX_83 said:I've still learned from this exchange, however. I think I've learned a bit more about who I should try the hardest to reach and who I should simply let be.
Simply because we believe ourselves to be better-informed than others, doesn't mean we are.
Simply because we feel we should 'teach' or 'reach' others with our deeply philosophical and hard-won, cultivated wisdom, doesn't mean we should.
Reaching others' is not an indication that you know more, and they know less.
Reaching others means - as far as I am concerned, on this forum - simply exchanging ideas and discussing points of View - without making the assumption that simply because others voice disagreement, they're not playing the game.
If we set out with the pre-determined thought that "Hey I've got something here, gonna go out, spread the word and see who's on board!" we set out on the road which ultimately leads to 'perdition'. As many with that train of thought found to their cost....
It's a tiny leap on the keyboard from 'reach' to 'teach' - or even Preach....
6
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
@MX_83, the only way we will have unity is by accepting diversity.
The road to the hells is paved with good intentions and I think what you suggest would lead to bloodshed eventually.
I say teach children to meditate and let the labels fall where they may.
Perhaps, @MX_83, that when so many people seem unaccepting of an idea, it's good to consider why. But perhaps you are just that visionary and you imagine something we cannot. In which case, it is on you to put your idea into motion. I'll be curious to see how it goes in your quest to turn America into a Buddhist country.
When I was on retreat, I asked the Lama, "Lama la, I'd love to see kids in our community from a young age be exposed to more of these ideas. What is the best way to help them, especially if they have parents who are so resistant?"
His answer, "Open a preschool based on those tenets. See who comes. Go from there. If you are the only one who sees the opportunity, then it falls on you to make it happen."
@Kerome said:
Sounds like these Buddhists are too attached to their Buddha, lol.
Buddha attachment. Good term.
Some Buddhist paths are very attached to their Buddhas, mentioning no names ... oh all right, Shingon and Pureland for instance ...
However this can be skilful. It is a raft, not something to carry on ones back when the far shore is beached.
You may have heard ye olde Zen chestnut, 'If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him' - only of course the attached mind attachment/dependence, when appropriate ...
... and as @Jeffrey mentions in the next post watch out for Linji ... http://opcoa.st/0ccRq
ay curumba ... http://opcoa.st/0cFdc-78713
[lobster faints]
Comments
Okay. What if the entirety of the USA has buddha nature? It certainly does. Despite the inequality of wealth, racism, misogyny, xenophobia, public and police brutality, narcississm, rape, murder, insatiable greed, fundamentalism, the media, social media, unquenchable lust, politicians, pharmaceutical companies, big oil companies, prisons, gangs, just to mention a few of the obstacles to overcome, one would never suspect a buddha nature to be squeezed in there. But it is. After his enlightenment, the Buddha was in two minds about teaching the Dharma because it's so profound. He mightn't have uttered a peep had he become awakened in 21st century America. Yet there it is. Americans dwell in a beautiful catastrophe with the wherewithal to awaken to buddha nature ~ if ten million things don't get in the way first, or if they can just make some spare time to get mindful. Not sure there is even the capacity on a wide scale to grasp the subtlety of what a buddha nature even is, much less its emptiness. But its there. Maybe Mettayya Buddha could do it. A North American Rocker
Mettayya Buddha this time. How many maha kappas would that take? The presence of buddha nature in America is likely as close as we'll come to a preponderance of Buddhists in the USA for eons. So we're all Buddhists here in the States, we just may not know it (and won't for eons) yet. Present almost-enlightened company excluded, of course.
There is a certain truth in that. Western nations together have a certain heritage, which includes the separation of church and state, some measure of a grip on corruption, constitutional democracy and human rights. Some of these things have been exported to the rest of the world, others not. It would be interesting to see a more Buddhist America, or any western state, but I think it would remain part of a panoply of religious faiths.
A more important problem is how we deal with big money and capitalism. Money, how to spend it, how to get elected, how to lobby for budget, seems to have overtaken politics to the point where much of the real work is obscured. I'd like to see more countries follow Bhutan's example and start paying attention to the happiness of citizens.
@Kerome Bhutan still has numerous problems itself. They tout their happiness scale, and I think it is a great thing to consider. But they also admit they have a big problem with poverty and employment, heath care and education. Half of their citizens have never been to school and cannot read and living in heavy poverty leaves them exposed to numerous health problems. It is all connected, and they do not have the resources to expand the fixes of those problems to their whole nation.
One of the directors of the office that tracks their happiness scale said this:
“Despite the positive publicity for Bhutan in the course of spreading GNH, we have sent out a wrong message and as a result, most of the outside world wrongly thinks we are the happiest country in the world,” she explained.
Why stop at the U.S? There is a whole world to conquor!
Just kidding.
I'd like to see the world awaken but I don't know if that would mean everybody would have to be Buddhist.
Because of Buddhist values as I see them, our interconnectedness is easier seen through diversity of views rather than conversion.
We would have to do it like a sneaky mom hiding ground veggies in the cake. Add a sprinkle of Buddhist wisdom to everything without calling it Buddhism and suddenly a jealous God type being makes no sense to people.
Or simply just focus on young people. The people who would be most resistant would then just eventually enter their next lives.
It really depends on what you mean here. Teaching children how to think is different than teaching them what to think and the former is much more conducive to the Buddhist process than the latter.
^^^ Tee Hee.
More smart kids. Less Buddhist/Christian/indoctrinated muppets. Sounds like a master plan ...
There is obviously a terrible shortage of Buddhist video games, we are not reaching the younger generation and they are growing up immersed in guns, swords and dragons.
That's probably a comment laced with ironic humour, but it does prompt thought:
If technological influence is in part responsible for the behaviour and attitude of people today - what can be done to either restore a more constructive, positive and socially-responsible mindset, through its use - or without?
There are actually some decent games that are walking simulators that I find fit quite well with Buddhism, no violence involved. They are somewhat like Choose Your Own Adventure books made into games. I quite enjoy them. But they have no action and kids don't enjoy that very much. I don't think you will get kids interested unless the game has action (which doesn't have to mean violence).
It is up to each person to control how they use themselves in the tech/social media world. It is quite possible to use social media without falling into the crap that exists on it. I am in a couple of groups on FB that are wonderful, there are none of the typical comments and idiocy you usually see. There is plenty of it out there, I just chose not to immerse myself in it and engage with people who participate in it. Even when my friends post the crap, I just don't comment. There's no reason for me to. I'm not going to "school" them on anything. It doesn't help them, it doesn't help me, and it has the potential to harm us both. So I just don't go there.
That wasn't my question.
I know you pretty much have it all worked out for yourself. @karasti.
My question was about the general techno-socially-connected public in general...
ETA: That wasn't sarcasm, btw... I'm being honest - you DO pretty much have it all worked out!
In some ways the fast lane of life has gotten a lot faster. Gone are the days of jet-setting, now if you are not webcasting a vlog every day and connection to a hundred thousand Twitter followers you're not part of the "in crowd". This has a few implications, both for creators and consumers. But it is mostly in the realm of communication - it doesn't change the skilful or unskillful nature of what you say. You can choose to share skillfuly, like skillfuly, to influence the behaviour of a group.
Perhaps in the future we will see projects to bring greater social awareness to groups - for example allowing people to input their giving behaviour, or aggregate spending on alcohol, or car sharing miles. Then you could project consequences, and see "this group that I am a member of has saved X tonnes of CO2 emitted" and be inspired, aware of what you could do to contribute to changing behaviour on the group level.
But I think most of all one should be aware of places that foster a sense of online community. Things like a newspaper are not, things like a mental health forum which shares academic papers are. If we all do what we can to make those places better and more involved, then we can fill the Internet with worthwhile communities. Be a good citizen, and encourage others to do likewise.
This extends to how you architect a site. If you provide opportunities for people to share worthwhile things and encourage doing good things for each other, you can guide people into good behaviour.
It's an interesting area... Bears further thought...
Not entirely. The funniest musings are often funny because they are true.
@federica LOL I wish I had it all figured out! I have a hard time balancing when I need to get rid of a group or even an online friend and when I should keep them because we both need the lessons. That balance is hard to find. I have to look at if I am leaving/unfriending/hiding/whatever because of my discomfort and then look what happens if I surround myself only with those who are like me.
I just try not to stick myself into the craziness that happens online like I used to. I don't comment on articles just to poke people who I disagree with, nor with the idea that I can change their minds. I have a good friend who, when she has PMS or is otherwise feeling cranky, she specifically goes to sites she disagrees with (like anti-vaxxers) and trolls them because she's feeling bitchy. I don't get that, and learning more about that side of her has made me question if I've really known her all these years. If I'm not sure that what I want to say will be harmful or helpful, then I don't say it, I guess.
@karasti
I have a good friend who, when she has PMS or is otherwise feeling cranky, she specifically goes to sites she disagrees with (like anti-vaxxers) and trolls them because she's feeling bitchy.
I can totally get that. It's almost like an itch that needs to be scratched. Is there any such thing as a male PMS?
Ah. That old joke.
"If men had PMS - who'd notice?"
Religious people, Buddhists included, are so peaceful when they're out of power. Give them power and see how peaceful they really are.
I think some Far Asian countries are doing that... HHDL does pretty well imho
@Kerome ahh, but you'll find questionable things in the HHDL's rule as well, if you look for them. His strong wording/ban of Dorje Shugden, for example. The history of slaves in his palaces as well. Thailand has one of the more corrupt political and justice systems out there. They are bursting with Buddhism. And what to make of the Buddhist monk Ashin Wirathu and his followers in Myanmar/Burma?
The problem is, as soon as you let monks have power, those who desire power will come to the monkhood. I suspect the Buddha's solution, of monks as wandering beggars spreading the dharma, is not so bad, all things considered.
We should go full-on Buddhist theodemocracy.
Marilyn Monroe? Amy Winehouse? Some truths are better left unrealized.
Adoption of Buddhist values by the majority of people rather than conversion may be a option. Institutionalised religion has its own undesirable side effects.
I don't understand the connection...
I might as well say Mother Teresa, Marie Curie....
Point being?
@federica yeah. I was also confused. We were talking about male PMS . Yes?
Lots of experience with men—and suicide.
Some truths are better left unrealized.
That's a very passive approach and one that ultimately undermines change.
I just don't see it that way. Not only do people tend to find a new outlet for their religious tendencies once they've abandoned religion, but they also tend to find new organizations and causes to latch onto once they've left an organization or institution.
Your assertion here also sort of reminds me of the tangents practicing Buddhists who grew up in the Cold War era will go into about their disdain for religion, even though they're actively practicing one. Lol. Times change.
One could take several approaches to that. Perhaps a society which had separation of church and state but sufficiently advanced and non-attached citizens might give rise to a new politics. Or perhaps we need a ground-up religious Neo Buddhist organisation which is state sponsored to teach everyone the contents of their mind from a young age.
Somehow the second sounds a little dystopian, not sure I would like that future.
@MX_83 A lot of people who practice Buddhism consider it more of a philosophy than a religion. There are quite a few people who limit the definition and their understanding of religion as theistic. God/Gods are almost always wrapped up in definitions of religion, which is usually what people are referring to if they seem to be suggesting otherwise.
I don't see much difference in the difficulties faced by a country or it's joe average citizenry.
Both would rather blame external circumstances as the cause of their difficulties rather than being willing to face and address their own personal ignorance's.
A tribe of one or a tribe of millions are just different colors of the same delusion.
Is the windmill deluded or....... the white Buddhist knight charging at it?
This world is an ever changing expression of dukkha to journey through.
Can you address it's expression of Dukkha any more effectively than you can your own?
Are they any different?
Hmm.
A not-so-passive conversion method to Buddhism...
That sounds like conformity.
Sorry, that's a bit of a stretch - from 'a bit cranky' to men and suicide.
I disagree.
The important kind of change needed for a better country or world for that matter isn't the superficial adoption of one religion over another. What's most important are the inner positive qualities that would be developed.
I can easily imagine two types of worlds, one where everyone becomes a Buddhist but they don't change on the inside to be more loving and wise. And another world where people keep their same religions but change the emphasis to the models that emphasize the development of wisdom and compassion.
No doubt the full reality of male PMS jumped out at them like the Hounds of Tindalos from the spaces between dimensions.
I don't think ethnic Buddhists see it this way. I understand that this view is somewhat common in the West because it was deliberately propagated that way, but I still can't get over the sense that you're being a bit of a Projecty McPsychologicalprojectorface.
Then let's not be superficial!
I can easily imagine a world where none of the above happens, and Buddhadharma become just another religious metaphor holding great truths whose insights are the sole purview of academics as a device for their obscure musings. And securing grants from whoever is in power.
Or unity.
If you went to sleep tonight and woke up in Antarctica only to learn that you had been placed in suspended animation for 100 years, and you had to choose between living either in a hybrid democracy and Buddhist theocracy or somewhere in a huge Islamic caliphate, which offer would you take?
Is the finger pointing to the moon deluded or the crew of jackasses who strap themselves atop a controlled explosion so they can walk on it? I find that, ultimately, such dichotomies are false.
@MX_83 I wasn't talking about ethnic Buddhists, I was only responding to your comment about people who practice Buddhism but mock religion as a whole. There's a reason they do that. Anyhow, it's obvious you have zero interest in entertaining any views other than your own, so I'm done here. When you respond to everything everyone says with "But...your'e wrong" you aren't being open to the discussion and learning from different views. You only want people to see why you think you are right.
I don't agree with you about this, but I can certainly agree to disagree.
Ultimately, I realize that you disagree with most of what I've said or proposed, and I understand that your perspective is very different from mine, and I value that. However, overall I don't really find what you're saying to be compelling. I'm not required to agree with you anymore than you're required to agree with me. I've still learned from this exchange, however. I think I've learned a bit more about who I should try the hardest to reach and who I should simply let be.
Regarding Buddhist practitioners in the West, I'm not entirely sure that the "Buddhism as philosophy" expedient is still as popular as it once was, and I'm doubtful that it will be as influential in the future. My view is that others would be better served by coming to the Buddhadharma with the same earnestness as the ethnic Buddhists do. Maybe even more earnestly.
Awesome comment. I wish I had said that.
A religion devoid of name, practiced in a country free of allegiance.
I'll join.
'Christ be with you' as we X-Buddhists from the United (inner) States say ...
Frankly, I'm not entirely sure what motivates some of you space-aliens of Western Buddhists. It's as if you're saying, "I love riding bikes, I just don't like 'handles,'" so to speak. I just can't identify with your perspective here, for a number of reasons. It's kind of like... Why did you become Buddhist in the first place?
You're missing the point. There are lots of different worlds that can be imagined, I was using these two to illustrate the point about what is the important thing to change, namely inner qualities and not just religion. As you say we could imagine a country of all Buddhists that aren't superficial, but that kind of proves my point about the important thing is the inner change and not the outer form of religion.
Usually its to reduce our suffering or become better people or some such thing, not so we can have the label of Buddhist or participate in Buddhist ritual.
I think it's just the opposite—that rather, you have missed my point, and I suspect that the root of this breakdown in communication has to do with deeply embedded assumptions stemming from us having disparate respective worldviews. (Or so experience has taught me.) Furthermore, out of the infinity of worlds that could be imagined, some are more probable than others, and while I am in no way contesting that substance should be valued over empty form, sometimes propagating the form is a good way to encourage the substance. Every problem looks like a nail when you have a hammer, and perhaps many, who otherwise would not have, can attain a significant and influential degree of awakening if they are brought into the Buddhadharma.
This is a significant aspect of what I'm proposing. What mystifies me is why so many here are resistant to the idea, and why they view the objections they have to it as being valid to the degree that they assume. Maybe you guys are a little WEIRD (Western Educated Industrialized Rich Democratic)?
I think maybe its an issue of practicality. Conversion of the US into an all Buddhist country is totally impossible, it would take the threat of government, or aliens or some other powerful force, forcing conversion at the end of a gun and killing those who would rather die than give up their beliefs.
A vision where everyone decided in their own right to convert and wholeheartedly embraced Buddhism would indeed make a better country, but lets be real here.
I'm all for efforts that expand Buddhist outreach, increasing opportunities for others to encounter and benefit from the teachings but not efforts aimed at converting people, which assumes some level of persuasion. They have to come to it of their own accord.
And what if they became Buddhists? Then someone might say 'what if they became Buddhists of my sect? (and not those 'others')'
Jeffrey that reminds me of this story:
Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"
He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"
He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"
Northern Conservative†Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over.
I think this is a view often held by those lacking in rigour, but in fact it opens the door for falsification of substance under the guise of form. Hence I am not a fan.
The resistance that you seem to be noticing is probably due to the hard-won western attitude towards religion, that it should be separate from the state and not allowed to interfere, and that people should be free to choose their own religion. If you had spent two thousand years arguing this point with a procession of Popes, you would be reluctant to abandon it too!
That said, I think many parts of Buddhism are highly beneficial to the development of a more enlightened humanity. I would like to see it spread and develop. On the other hand, there are parts that are archaic and less than useful - the Buddhist cosmology seems very dubious, and Buddha worship a bit contrary to the whole doctrine of enlightenment, whatever justifications are made for it.
Simply because we believe ourselves to be better-informed than others, doesn't mean we are.
Simply because we feel we should 'teach' or 'reach' others with our deeply philosophical and hard-won, cultivated wisdom, doesn't mean we should.
Reaching others' is not an indication that you know more, and they know less.
Reaching others means - as far as I am concerned, on this forum - simply exchanging ideas and discussing points of View - without making the assumption that simply because others voice disagreement, they're not playing the game.
If we set out with the pre-determined thought that "Hey I've got something here, gonna go out, spread the word and see who's on board!" we set out on the road which ultimately leads to 'perdition'. As many with that train of thought found to their cost....
It's a tiny leap on the keyboard from 'reach' to 'teach' - or even Preach....
@MX_83, the only way we will have unity is by accepting diversity.
The road to the hells is paved with good intentions and I think what you suggest would lead to bloodshed eventually.
I say teach children to meditate and let the labels fall where they may.
Perhaps, @MX_83, that when so many people seem unaccepting of an idea, it's good to consider why. But perhaps you are just that visionary and you imagine something we cannot. In which case, it is on you to put your idea into motion. I'll be curious to see how it goes in your quest to turn America into a Buddhist country.
When I was on retreat, I asked the Lama, "Lama la, I'd love to see kids in our community from a young age be exposed to more of these ideas. What is the best way to help them, especially if they have parents who are so resistant?"
His answer, "Open a preschool based on those tenets. See who comes. Go from there. If you are the only one who sees the opportunity, then it falls on you to make it happen."
Then they will be like, 'My buddha can beat up your buddha.'
Not even joking, btw. Buddhist sects also fight, just like other religions. So better to be a good person than a good Buddhist (or whatever).
Here I have a thought experiment.
If you could choose would you rather
A) 100% of the world practice the 5 precepts?
Or would you rather
B ) 0.01% of the world become enlightened Buddhas or Arhats (and have no result of the 5 precepts on the 100%).
If rather than it being your choice between A and B what do you think is more realistic to accomplish?
Sounds like these Buddhists are too attached to their Buddha, lol.
Buddha attachment. Good term.
Some Buddhist paths are very attached to their Buddhas, mentioning no names ... oh all right, Shingon and Pureland for instance ...
However this can be skilful. It is a raft, not something to carry on ones back when the far shore is beached.
You may have heard ye olde Zen chestnut, 'If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him' - only of course the attached mind attachment/dependence, when appropriate ...
... and as @Jeffrey mentions in the next post watch out for Linji ...
http://opcoa.st/0ccRq
ay curumba ...
http://opcoa.st/0cFdc-78713
[lobster faints]
And if you see master Linji on the road run because he has a stick!