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.
Being a Buddhist doesn't mean renouncing social engagement.
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 :::
I tend to agree with this.
One of the few criticisms I had about Thai Buddhist temples was the amount of just sitting around that monks did.
And people would argue, but maybe they were meditating. No. I can tell the difference between someone who is sitting in a small group shooting the bull and someone meditating. I can tell the difference between someone laying on a reclining chair in the wiharn snoring and someone who is meditating.
I don't believe that Buddha sat secluded in a cave most of his life. He went out and taught...which -- if he hadn't -- we wouldn't have his teachings.
That's why I agree with MaryAnne's statement that: "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."
Now, of course, the individual monk has the right to walk either path. I just know which path I respect.
I'm glad you see my point, even if you don't fully agree. It might help you get what I was saying (as well as what others were saying) that lead up to my last couple of posts before you joined in, if you go back and re-read the thread from the start.....
I think it's not Buddhism if liberation is not a mind training. We need some Pali Canon experts here such as @pegembra.
Criticizing 'some' monks for relaxing is a faulty argument because you can also criticize secular humanist (or however you call 'engaged Buddhists) for relaxing. Most every humanoid relaxes.
Yogis teach also. Pema Chodron said goin on retreat made your senses wide open rather than just slits. This was in an interview. Then she said that if she didn't come back to the marketplace that her retreat wasn't worth a hill of beans. My own teacher is on semi-retreat because the stress of managing the sangha was more than her body could handle; she also has cancer to battle.
I make the claim that the wisdom from retreat makes the teachings given more powerful. The foundation of that claim is that the mind is clear, luminous, and unimpeded thus if there is a great samadhi (as in the Pali Canon) then there is access to insights that can help all beings.
@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.
@Jeffrey, Again, you are taking the word self-centered and giving it a negative connotation. I said "self-centered endeavor" meaning it only revolved around that one person, excluding the outside world... that doesn't mean it's a 'negative' action. It is what it is, I have no desire to sit and worry about how individuals choose to walk their own personal path of Buddhism. Like I said, I was only comparing the end results of these very different "styles" as to how it impacts the community, etc. or not.
As for my personal, secular Buddhist path? Well, I took refuge; I try to live the Dharma -as best as I can; I respect the (5) precepts, the 4 noble truths & the 8 fold path. I'm on the fence about reincarnation and rebirth, I do believe in Karma, but probably not the way it's presented in The Big Books of Buddhism.... as for hell realms, Bodhisattvas vs "regular" Buddhists, and all the other religious and mystical aspects of Buddhism, I prefer to ignore them.
A Buddhist meditation practice that becomes a dissociative or isolating practice is better labeled as simply stepping off the path toward sufferings cessation. Such detours can occur as easily in caves as in the world.
Calling the external conditions where one practices as the inherent cause for selfish, selfless or any practice mixture in between, simply empowers the ego like all other adversarial concepts will.
This is one of the greatest hindrances to social engagement.
@MaryAnne. One thing my teacher said that was interesting to me was that each person has a different view of words. For example my teachers mom used the word depression to excuse bad behaviour. I probably have that wrong but I am trying to make a point. So for my teacher depression is a bad word. All of the sudden she has depressed students. So she had to teach herself to view the word differently otherwise it would divide her from her students. In my family being self-centered is a no no. So we just have different word associations
But we still disagree that mind training does or doesn't benefit the community. I think that everyone can become a Buddha. Even my dog. This motivates me to try to help people and be a kind supportive person. That is something I learned through mind training. If you will believe it I used to be a bully in school up until puberty where I was a weakling for awhile. My mind changed through my experiences to the point where I am totally transformed. I used to in elementary school sometimes have a lust for picking on the less popular. I didn't do it every day I am just hard on myself for maybe 10 incidents, but even 10 I had a lust to physically dominate others. I am totally reformed now through my experience. 'Change your mind and the rest will follow..." said a singing group some years ago.
Am I wrong in guessing you don't meditate?? That is directly the concentration spoke of the eightfold path.
Do you believe the eightfold path is just a very successful way to be happy or do you believe that you can be free from suffering 100%? Do you believe that you can achieve jhana through meditation which transforms the mind (though it shouldn't be the goal rather just a tool).
I used to meditate, almost daily, for many years. Since I chose this secular path (of Buddhism) a few years ago, I've only sat in meditation a few times. However, I do engage in intentional mindfulness, several times a day, each and every day. For me, it is a better engagement of the mind than meditation is. That could change tomorrow, or next month, or next year- but now this is how things are.
I believe following the 8 fold path, (5) precepts, and regarding the 4 noble truths DOES lead one to several levels of freedom from suffering- Do I believe anyone and everyone can reach freedom from ALL suffering all the time? No, I don't. Why? Because it's not easy, it's probably one of the most difficult things any human can do and if done, it won't be until after a devotion of many many years on the Buddhist path -- OR living in a cave.
Do I believe people can reach a true, authentic "enlightenment"? I don't know. If it does happen, it is so freakin' RARE an occurrence, that we may as well say it doesn't happen often enough to be documented as a real event.
Was the Buddha himself enlightened? Of course he was.... if you believe he was a real person. Was he a real person? I don't know - for sure. Like I've explained, my Buddhism is based much more in practicality, and a lot less in "faith". But I do happen to choose to believe he was real.
Do I believe his mother conceived him by means of a snow white baby elephant in her dreams? Do I believe that lotus blossoms literally sprang up instantaneously from his footsteps? Do I believe he took his first steps just moments after being born? No... those are religious stories that require a suspension of the belief in reality (and science).
I could go on.... but it's time for dinner and I have company coming over to play cards in a little while! Later tater!
'Engaged Buddhism is a term which came into use in the Buddhist world in the later part of the twentieth century. It emerged as Buddhist practitioners tried to evolve a practice situated within the social and ecological realities of their times. There are precedents for a socially engaged Buddhism throughout Buddhist history. But it also marks an attempt to reframe Buddhist practice in new historical times – where social agency, social change, citizenship and historical consciousness became important characteristics of modern life.
Engaged Buddhism can be understood as an expression of interconnectedness. Buddhist thought suggests that life is an intricate web of interconnections, in Thich Nhat Hahn’s words, we all “inter-are”. This means that every event – near or far, past or present is to do with us. We are connected with it and our response to it can help to heal or perpetuate its dis-ease. Each and every situation – locally and globally is an opportunity for compassion, for generosity, for truth and for equanimity.
......To avoid a discussion that goes round on circles, Jones writes: “It usually comes down in discussion as to what “engagement” means. This is why I prefer “SOCIALLY engaged Buddhism” This social engagement can take many forms which span from activism and campaigning, to social, educational and care work. Engaged Buddhists working in all these fields seek to explore how their practice can inform and find expression through this work.'
Social = populations. The opposite of secluded....or by yourself...... << mine
I think it's part of sila: right action, speach, and livelyhood. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't follow the other spokes of the eightfold path: meditation (concentration, mindfulness, effort), or wisdom (right intention and right view). Some people are specializing in sila and some specialize in wisdom or meditation. I reject the notion that empirically we can establish that one of those is more important than the other because it is like a three footed chair and they are all important.
I agree...however the social word kinda changes things up a bit... don't you think? Do what works, by all means. We all have different ways of doing things.....I'm all over this thread, because It's one of my passions....and I look forward to talking/discussing any and all ideas that have to do with it.
@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.)?
This is a great point. We shouldn't shame anyone including ourselves if we are not engaged. Engagement comes from an overflow of compassion not from beating up on ourselves. So let's not get depressed because we can't do anything. I remember hurricane Katrina my neighbors went down there with the red cross. I wasn't able to do something like that because of my mental illness.
So it is not cool to spread a notion of shame on people who are not able to engage.
Um...I think that might be a far reach.... You could perform wrong actions in a social way/setting. You kinda lost me there. Sorry...
I didn't understand. Isn't the social part of the OP thread about engagement about activism and good causes? I am saying that activism as one example of 'social' falls under the Buddhist concept of right action and speach. But not every social phenomena is to do with Sila. For example a bon fire is about enjoying nature etc and socializing, but it isn't activism. For activism I would have to say that sila is part and parcel with the notion of a good cause.
For the record, shame is not my intention. If for whatever reasons, through no fault of your own you cant socially engage....don't.
Start a thread about the other ways to engage. Ways that are not social. Why should I be made to feel ashamed about the path I'm active on?....and have to walk away from a thread about SOCIAL issues. This is tripping me out here....I'm going to cook dinner...
@Jeffrey, There was a distinction made regarding those who don't engage and those who can't (for whatever reason) engage.... again, I think you might be forgetting some of the earlier posts in this thread.
I have a short memory MaryAnne; thanks for the clarification. Actually I was reviewing the thread as you suggested when I came to betaboy's post which I thought had not been dealt with in the thread.
No worries I didn't feel upset, @Vastminds. I just missed @betaboy's question getting dealt with and I thought he asked a great question. Om. :om: I feel happy this nanomoment.
The problem is it's very difficult to stay on the path while living an "ordinary" life amongst hedonistic people. Even good, disciplined people are at risk when mingling with worldly folk.
@ John Dharmic friends are helpful but are not the whole story of the path.
If amongst ordinary hedonistic people, a Buddhist adopts such worldly values, the path has already been abandoned. This applies as much to the laity as monastics.
If amongst worldly hedonistic people, a Buddhist sees the suffering endemic in those worldly hedonistic values then any ground beneath his or her feet will be the path.
I think that the ease or difficulty in staying on the path always depends more on what you value than what anyone else values. If the Dharma was only visable as the Dharma within the confines of cloistered conditions, then we have to start spelling it with a small "d".
@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.
Movies and entertainment are considered worldly as the joy comes through the five cords of sense desire.
We are often lost in the movies of our mind. There's a Zen story about a hermit monk who painted a tiger on the walls of his cave. He painted it so realistically that when he finished, he looked at it and became frightened. It takes practice to wake up, to emerge from our mind-created worlds.
That is what movies are. For that moment we are transported into the delights of a make-believe world. It is tough enough as it is to break away from the passionate engagement from the "real" world with all the attendant stories.
Any beings who are not devoid of passion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of passion, focus with even more passion on things inspiring passion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of aversion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of aversion, focus with even more aversion on things inspiring aversion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival. Any beings who are not devoid of delusion to begin with, who are bound by the bond of delusion, focus with even more delusion on things inspiring delusion presented by an actor on stage in the midst of a festival.
"Now, O monks, what is worldly joy? There are these five cords of sense desire: forms cognizable by the eye that are wished for and desired, agreeable and endearing, associated with sense-desire and tempting to lust. Sounds cognizable by the ear... odors cognizable by the nose... flavors cognizable by the tongue... tangibles cognizable by the body, wished for and desired, agreeable and endearing, associated with sense-desire and tempting to lust. It is the joy that arises dependent on these five cords of sense desire which is called 'worldly joy.'
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.
I've never heard of a Buddhist living in a cave ( not in the UK, anyway! ), and I don't recognise your characterisation of monasteries. At the monasteries and communities I've visited the monks / nuns / resident community put a lot of time into running retreats, spending time with the lay community, etc.
Getting back OT, while I am a fierce advocate of the socially engaged Buddhism movement, I have always seen one glaring problem that I simply can't put aside. Social engagement (not just charity) means engaging in conflict. There are always some people who don't want change and others who want to change it in ways you see as harmful. You have to enter into conflict or you're just an observer.
It seems an almost insurmountable task to work toward a better world without ending up in a battle of "us versus them" which is hardly conducive to non-Duality and compassion for all.
Even if you have the best of intentions, trying to change the wrongs of the world means eventually seeing the truth that these wrongs are caused or at least maintained by a small group of selfish, powerful, rich people. Being socially engaged means looking at a town being sucked dry of its last water and knowing there is a room full of rich businessmen who know this but care more about profits from fracking. They have their justifications, of course, and are no better or worse than most people in the world, but who really cares about the suffering of the slave owner when you hear the cries of the slaves?
So socially engaged means ending up in a never ending battle, and the world already has enough warriors on either side. There is a good reason why Buddhism has tried to stay above it all so its not part of the problem, even if it's not much of a solution.
Don't forget the Buddhist monks involved in the ethnic purging of Muslims from Myanmar believe they're being socially engaged, and who can dispute that? They see this as defending their society against an evil. In their case, social engagement has been infected by hatred and bigotry.
So what do you folks think? Are we trying to turn Buddhism into something it simply can't handle without destroying something that makes it unique?
^^^ Good points. I can only say that I have over the years been very mindful of this possible state of duality that can be created in the process. The way I have tried to approach causes is not to be against something or someone but for something or someone. Like...I'm not against war...I'm for peace. I'm not against set views from a time gone by....I'm for civil rights for everyone. I'm not against people wanting to be straight...I'm for people being lawfully able to sleep with who they want. I'm not against people making money...I'm for everyone having enough to eat. I have never considered myself an angry protester...(well, maybe the last KKK march got me a little heated), hahah. Of course, there are times that I may not be able to keep it in frame...but that can go for anyone, anywhere. Even in a cave.
The Myanmar example? Well...to be honest, I don't know enough about both sides to comment....but it seems extremely more complicated than I can solve. I'm for them both learning to live together. (That's the best I can do on that one).
Yes, it's a big task....but I owe it to my children.....who are black....and who's generations not too long ago were treated inhuman. Beaten and hung from trees. Slavery may have been outlawed...but it just got pushed in the closet. It's alive as ever. Just as [we] find animal rights important (we don't eat them)... human rights are also important.
These practices may not be for everyone...just as the cave and sitting for days at a time may not be for everyone....Maybe it's just door #81,000.
The social engagement that I follow is to take Mahayana Bodhisattva path. I wish to help people in need both physical and mental. I don't mind which religion they follow, as long as they are well outside and inside, I am OK with it.
While the Tzu Chi Foundation has Buddhist origins and beliefs, the organization is also popularly known for its selfless contributions to society in numerous ways in the areas of Charity, Medicine, Education, and Culture. The official motto, or concept behind Tzu Chi Foundation is the (四大志業,八大腳印), which means, "Four endeavors, eight footprints". The eight footprints are charity causes, medical contributions, education development, humanities, international disaster assistance, bone-marrow donation, community volunteerism, and environmental protection.
Of course, but different people have different priorities. For some people a family and career are important, for others they're not.
Yes, that was my point. It's ok to own up to our own priorities. I only brought up my stats because people seem to think it can only be one way or another.
This thread seems to have had everyone feeling/acting defensive.... including me. I'm going to call it a day on this one....
Steve Hagen said that his students were all enlightened until they opened their mouths. I follow this approach. The trouble is that I'm required to open my mouth for work. I long to just be.
Hello: I really enjoyed your article. I like this venue and the many enlightening participants. I agree with you and the spirit of Mahayana that we should engage and that householders especially should practice their arts in the community. We bear enlightenment to the world in a way the Hinayana does not.
It is difficult to learn enough of the Buddha's teachings to give definitive answers to questions. There are many schools and many subjects. I find real pleasure in the varied replies I find here in this group. I have been a Buddhist since 1965. I have read a lot and meditated a lot but I know I am still just a lay person-a householder. I try to do a good job and speak up only when I am sure I understand. Of course I still err.
I write in economics and history and I know the subjects pretty well. I am not just a layperson. And yet I know the subjects are complex and easily misconstrued. The specialized languages of Science and Economics and History are much like the various lineages of Buddhism. I follow the Nyingma tradition because it teaches most of the various paths. I try to take the large picture and encompass the whole subject and relate each to the next. This is not easy.
While I respect the Buddhist teachings and I want to see them applied to the world and especially here in America where it is so easy and so valuable and needed. I realize it is easy to speak high mindedly and grasp after high ideals while going in the wrong direction because of a failure to fully grasp the terrain. In America the terrain is the Constitution. America is a Republic. America is a nation of laws-not strictly a Democracy. If one has not read the eightfold path or the four noble truths or the three ignorances which cause bewilderment one is not in a position to speak with authority about the Buddha's teachings. Then you talk about your experiences and your gains and aspirations and you ask questions. Strangely people who have never read the Constitution feel they are authorities about American Politics. They judge conditions by their feelings or aspirations or personal agenda and advise others on very little understanding. The first Paramita is Liberality and that includes giving the good to the other, coming down on the side of people and correcting mistaken teachings. That should also be the way in the relationships of our nation.
It is our liberty and our rule of law that Makes America work so well. We are a classless society-more than any other. We are a generous nation more so as a % of income than any other people (less so in the last 50 years). Our Constitution and our laws are the source of our greatness. Our free people create wealth, upward mobility and well being like no other nation in the history of the world. We are Equal under the law.
The powerful state has never been a source of blessings or well being for many for long. The unbridled state crushes it's people and wages cruel war on other peoples. That is why our founding fathers formed a Republic. A nation of laws with checks on state power and a balance between the powers. We are losing that and we are losing it in the name of doing good, being fair and securing an equal outcome for all. The equal outcome of state power has always-most every time-been a lessening of well being of most all and the ascendency of a few. I know this is not what you want and it is not what most Buddhists want. Wouldn't it be sad if we made great efforts with high minded aspirations and all got together and pushed in the wrong direction. Saying high minded things is not the same as accomplishing high minded goals. Promoting generosity is not being generous. I here a fabulously wealthy man say over and over again 'rich people should pay more taxes' . He is right. Rich people should. That rich man made hundred of millions of dollars last year and only paid taxes on about 1/2 of his income. On the other 1/2 of his income he paid about .6 % that is less than 1 %. If he wants the billionaires to pay more he can just right a check. He can stop using the tax laws to duck most all of his taxes. He speaks high words but he dirty deals. Most really wealthy people pay little in taxes because the code is corrupt. What would the Buddha say? The issues are complex.
Before we support groups and issues we should make the effort to learn about the basic elements. Like the eightfold path and the noble truths. Those are the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence.... Before we speak against or support we should learn a little history. We should understand some economics. We should look at all sides and judge rightly. Why are we equal under the law? That is the 14th amendment. Who passed it? When was it passed. Why does Justice Thurgood Marshall the Supreme court justice say: we people of color cherish the 13, 14, and 15th amendments? When were those passed? Who did that? If we are duped because we are ignorant it won't be surprising if we lose our liberties. It's easy to be better informed. If we as Buddhists are going to get involved in the politics and issues of our nation we should do so responsibly. I think we should be involved. We should be informed. Our nation needs our wisdom and our ability to rise above our petty personal benefits and do what is right for most of the people with all of our efforts.
I hope to continue in this group. I feel useful and I have learned. I find people to admire and I feel part of a like minded group. Like your religion your politics is your choice- at least for the time being. I hope you and our fellow participants wield that choice with wisdom and with knowledge. Start with the Constitution and it's history. You can easily find everything on the net.
Thank you for your services and your fine site. Dennis
Hello: I really enjoyed your article. I like this venue and the many enlightening participants. I agree with you and the spirit of Mahayana that we should engage and that householders especially should practice their arts in the community. We bear enlightenment to the world in a way the Hinayana does not.
Thank you for your services and your fine site. Dennis
Hey Dennis. I didn't really get much from your post. (many of us aren't Americans). While it's not a problem for me, the statement you made above is very likely to cause considerable offence among our Theravedan membership.
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.
Yogi in a cave, like Dharma on a cycle, is for our inspiration, aspiration and ultimately we all cave in to our inner seclusion even in the midst of life. It is part of the same journey expressed through different attitudes, roles and comprehensions. It is about stillness. From the still comes our movement towards an idealisation.
I once met a teaching dervish who literally as a Westerner went to meditate in a cave, he came down met a teacher and engaged with the world again. Sometimes these behaviours are temporary.
What is the purpose of living a focussed, one pointed, extreme devotion to practice and enlightenment lifestyle in a Himalayan cave? It is simply the intention to increase the likelihood of realisation. Once realised, then what? Then what is required to alleviate suffering? What does that entail? Still know? Still fishing?
As a dharma alter ego advocate, we can all be inspired by the real life sacrifices of our heroes:
Robin: "Where'd you get a live fish, Batman?" Batman: "The true crimefighter always carries everything he needs in his utility belt, Robin." http://adamwest.tripod.com/b-lectur.htm
Hello Robot: Your are right and I am sorry. 1. I foolishly assumed all of the American English meant this was an American site. Also I was replying to the article which seems pretty American. I will try to make fewer assumptions. I know they are part of delusion and unworthy. 2. It has been my view that Hinayana Buddhist mostly withdraw from society and let the "other" to what they do. The Mahayana however engages. Since that is challenged by the actions of the Theravadins in this group that is obviously a foolish assumption. I meant as a great vehicle practioner we do enlightening activities and Hinayana concentrates on being enlightened. I guess I got that from the Avatamsaka Sutra.
I will try to do better. Your help is appreciated. I meant no harm. May the good be yours.
Well, Thank you all. I won't make that mistaken assumption again. I see the Paramitas as self perfection for the benefit of others. For me withdrawing is not an option. I knew a Thai guy who told me: In Thailand the Buddhists just hole up in their monastery's and keep away from the suffering of others. Thailand doesn't seem like a very happy place and I might have gotten the wrong idea. P.S. I don't try to convert others I mostly just reach out to them and try to help lessen suffering. Sometimes I share Buddha quotes. If I see a reach I share more. It is my view that it is very hard to change hearts or "convert others" I spare myself that failure. No Christians (including my own family), come to me and ask for my help in becoming a Buddhist-except maybe on this site. My wife is a Catholic and I am proud of her.
Jayantha, I'm sorry you left the Libertarian group. I recently read Rothbard and he makes a lot of sense-although I am not a Libertarian I see a lot of value in their activities. I hope they prosper. America is struggling with a growing push to take away our liberties. Well, I hope you succeed in your current plans. I apologize to those Theravadins whom I offended. May the good be yours.
Jeffrey: I have read a lot of your comments and you seem like a pretty enlightened being. Maybe we view the subject differently. If you mean become a Buddha with an Illusory body, well that is a pretty high standard. If you mean awakened, much less self grasping, understanding the suffering of others and reaching out to enlighten others-well I think you have already demonstrated that in the comments I have read. It is necessary to continue the effort of self perfection no matter the level of understanding-maybe more so as you grow. Self smugness is pretty useless. Asserting righteousness even more useless. But enlightened activity doesn't require some divine presence.
It's nice to bring emptiness and skillful means into your life and experience a little more bliss and light but I think it is the selfless reaching out to others that is the demonstration of enlightenment. The development of Bodhicitta is a gradient activity. It's true that there is sometimes a great leap like Atiyoga, Dzogchen, and the Anuttara teachings speak of, but those are flowers on the path. The enlightened path is Realization and the peace that develops from dropping the self grasping. I hope you will re assess your comment and look to your growth as an extension of your capacities as an enlightening and enlightened being. Perfection is down the road-somewhere-and isn't really the Buddha's point. He started out just noticing the suffering of others and right then enlightenment was in his heart. Modesty which does not come from self realization is pretty useless. Yours seems pretty fine and uplifting. That doesn't mean you are not enlightened. Peace be yours.
This really is one of those topics that will have a wide variety of responses depending on the tradition and background of the person making a response.
That being said, what i seem to see a lot in this thread is a degradation or a lessening of the importance of personal practice. I think this comes from a misunderstanding many people have regarding the theravada being about self only and maya/vaj being about others.
The buddha, in the pali suttas, viewed the HIGHEST thing you can do for others is to destroy your own attachment/aversion/ignorance(3 roots) , because this gives a gift of fearlessness to all beings and brings about a more beneficial life for yourself and those around you.
I personally experience this to be very true. More true then the concept of the bodisattva, which makes less sense to me, simply because life shows me that people can truely only change and help themselves, and the way to a true fantasy utopia is for everyone to practice and live dhamma, not some people who are filled with the three roots saving others with the three roots.
Now that being said. I have also been an activist and have a strong sense of justice and making a better life for the people. This lead me to at one point being the chair forthe southern half of my state in the Libertarian party. I hit the streets many a time including deep in some of the dangerous cities to try and educate people about their rights etc. Ive always been educated and politically active since being a teenager. Ive also always had a strong sense of dana.
The more i got into my practice i began to see cycles in politics and social activies. As a student of history i know history repeats itself. You cant REALLY make lasting change in this world.. Except in youself. I got out of politics and have been gradually retreating from what most people consider normal actives, and moving towards renunciation.
Now that being said, i actually feel i will be able to help the most people as a monastic. I want to live in a cave by myself and meditate, but i also know my practice, skills, and experience can benefit many people "with little dust in their eyes", who are searching like i was.
This is a great site. I've never experienced this level of engagement before. My wife sees me typing and understands the joy I take in my participation. She is happy for my discovery. Sweet. Thank you all. Jeffrey-this is my bow. mtgby Dennis
I just noticed: This site organizes our comments by time. And unlike in actual time in the universe, time is not everywhere the same. It's funny that the site should make clear this often misunderstood factor in the world. Everything happens now. Now this comment will be placed above Jeffrey's comment Bowdown-as my last one was, and it will be out of actual sequence but in time sequence. A fine demonstration of Buddhist teachings and one of the causes of delusion. mtgby
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".
Nice comment and lovely quote. Another Francis quote is "All saints teach the same thing." This has guided me often. Thank you.
MaryAnne on 8 Nov 2013 ~ 12:40pm said Hi> I like your comment. However, I think sitting in a cave detached fro everything misses out on Bodhicitta and most of the Paramitas. I'm not sure that is the fast route to enlightenment. I'm also not sure that that type of detachment is so easy. I have meditated 12 hours a day for quite a while-single point meditation. I got terrific insights and felt I could read people's body motion with great accuracy. But I soon wanted to get back out and engage. The enlightened mind sort of demands engagement.
@Jayantha, you are also a sentient being and Buddha certainly wishes you to be saved. There is nothing wrong with saving yourself alone. Besides, there are many Theravada sanghas who teach other people about Buddhism, meaning they reach out to help other people to learn to reach enlightenment.
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
@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.)?
This is a great point. We shouldn't shame anyone including ourselves if we are not engaged. Engagement comes from an overflow of compassion not from beating up on ourselves. So let's not get depressed because we can't do anything. I remember hurricane Katrina my neighbors went down there with the red cross. I wasn't able to do something like that because of my mental illness.
So it is not cool to spread a notion of shame on people who are not able to engage.
What? Who can't smile at somebody feeling down?
You don't have to be some brazen hero, saving people from certain doom to help alleviate the suffering in the world.
Cinorjer said: Don't forget the Buddhist monks involved in the ethnic purging of Muslims from Myanmar believe they're being socially engaged, and who can dispute that? They see this as defending their society against an evil. In their case, social engagement has been infected by hatred and bigotry
This is a strange comment. Are you a Buddhist? Buddhist texts don't promote the slaughter of any minority or majority of non Buddhists. On the other hand Muslims do and the Koran does-I've studied it. The sword verses are very clear. History is also very clear. When the Muslims took over India around 800AD they tortured and mutilated the Hindus but they slaughtered all Buddhists. This is common known policy of Islamic states. Pushing out or even killing people who are determined to wipe out you and your family and friends to the last person is not hatred and bigotry? Try survival.
You say you think conflict is necessary well sometimes it is. In defense of your whole people it is not called hatred and bigotry. It's called the struggle to stay alive. Most current Islamic States got that way by military take over and slaughter of everyone who didn't convert. History is plain. Maybe you should be asking more questions. If you disagree with this I will happily share chapter and verse and historical dates. This is not a moot point. I actually I don't see much virtue in the rest of your commentary either. You could try asking more questions. Reading. And spending less time with nasty minded comedians.
It is self conceit to regard being socially-engaged as being superior to a hermit who spend years meditating in a cave away from society. Your opinion is not superior to Buddha's teachings. Dont forget we are talking about Buddhism .
The ultimate goal is to escape samsara. Not to help make the world a better place. If even the Buddha could not solve the world's problems, what makes you think you can do better? The dhutanga practice is encouraged if one is so inclined.
You cannot give the world what you dont have. There are many people in this world who tries to help change the world for the better. Yet they cant even control their own attachments and temper.
It is nice to say I want to be a socially engaged Buddhist. But have you worked on your own mind?
It is better to master your own mind than to conquer a thousand armies. ~ Buddha.
It is self conceit to regard being socially-engaged as being superior to a hermit who spend years meditating in a cave away from society. Your opinion is not superior to Buddha's teachings. Dont forget we are talking about Buddhism .
The ultimate goal is to escape samsara. Not to help make the world a better place. If even the Buddha could not solve the world's problems, what makes you think you can do better? The dhutanga practice is encouraged if one is so inclined.
You cannot give the world what you dont have. There are many people in this world who tries to help change the world for the better. Yet they cant even control their own attachments and temper.
It is nice to say I want to be a socially engaged Buddhist. But have you worked on your own mind?
It is better to master your own mind than to conquer a thousand armies. ~ Buddha.
The trick is non-attached engagement.
If we do not understand that we are taught, by the Buddha's own example, to be engaged with the pain and suffering of the world, we understand nothing of his life and work. Consider this: he achieved Enlightenment and could have chosen, we are told, to "go beyond" (whatever that might mean). After long consideration he chose to enter into dialogue with others and to Turn the Wheel of Dharma. We may not have his power of teaching but we are bound, on the Noble Eightfold Path, to do that which is in our power for others/
It is self conceit to regard being socially-engaged as being superior to a hermit who spend years meditating in a cave away from society. Your opinion is not superior to Buddha's teachings. Dont forget we are talking about Buddhism .
The ultimate goal is to escape samsara. Not to help make the world a better place. If even the Buddha could not solve the world's problems, what makes you think you can do better? The dhutanga practice is encouraged if one is so inclined.
You cannot give the world what you dont have. There are many people in this world who tries to help change the world for the better. Yet they cant even control their own attachments and temper.
It is nice to say I want to be a socially engaged Buddhist. But have you worked on your own mind?
It is better to master your own mind than to conquer a thousand armies. ~ Buddha.
Not sure who or what you're addressing exactly; but I for one certainly never said that "being socially-engaged as being superior to a hermit who spend years meditating in a cave away from society." I said that being Buddhist and being socially engaged aren't mutually exclusive concepts, and that "it makes sense to have people motivated by things like non-greed, non-aversion, and non-delusion add their voices to the mix, not to mention helping do what they can to fix things like inequality and injustice as long as it’s done with a spirit of compassion and harmlessness." Did the Buddha himself turn a blind eye to the world after achieving enlightenment, or did he actively engage with it in his own way, one that attempted to help improve the lives of others? All I'm saying is, practicing meditation isn't the only way to help others or ourselves.
Comments
One of the few criticisms I had about Thai Buddhist temples was the amount of just sitting around that monks did.
And people would argue, but maybe they were meditating. No. I can tell the difference between someone who is sitting in a small group shooting the bull and someone meditating. I can tell the difference between someone laying on a reclining chair in the wiharn snoring and someone who is meditating.
I don't believe that Buddha sat secluded in a cave most of his life. He went out and taught...which -- if he hadn't -- we wouldn't have his teachings.
That's why I agree with MaryAnne's statement that: "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."
Now, of course, the individual monk has the right to walk either path. I just know which path I respect.
I'm glad you see my point, even if you don't fully agree.
Criticizing 'some' monks for relaxing is a faulty argument because you can also criticize secular humanist (or however you call 'engaged Buddhists) for relaxing. Most every humanoid relaxes.
Yogis teach also. Pema Chodron said goin on retreat made your senses wide open rather than just slits. This was in an interview. Then she said that if she didn't come back to the marketplace that her retreat wasn't worth a hill of beans. My own teacher is on semi-retreat because the stress of managing the sangha was more than her body could handle; she also has cancer to battle.
I make the claim that the wisdom from retreat makes the teachings given more powerful. The foundation of that claim is that the mind is clear, luminous, and unimpeded thus if there is a great samadhi (as in the Pali Canon) then there is access to insights that can help all beings.
Again, you are taking the word self-centered and giving it a negative connotation. I said "self-centered endeavor" meaning it only revolved around that one person, excluding the outside world... that doesn't mean it's a 'negative' action. It is what it is, I have no desire to sit and worry about how individuals choose to walk their own personal path of Buddhism.
Like I said, I was only comparing the end results of these very different "styles" as to how it impacts the community, etc. or not.
As for my personal, secular Buddhist path?
Well, I took refuge; I try to live the Dharma -as best as I can; I respect the (5) precepts, the 4 noble truths & the 8 fold path. I'm on the fence about reincarnation and rebirth, I do believe in Karma, but probably not the way it's presented in The Big Books of Buddhism.... as for hell realms, Bodhisattvas vs "regular" Buddhists, and all the other religious and mystical aspects of Buddhism, I prefer to ignore them.
Such detours can occur as easily in caves as in the world.
Calling the external conditions where one practices as the inherent cause for selfish, selfless or any practice mixture in between, simply empowers the ego like all other adversarial concepts will.
This is one of the greatest hindrances to social engagement.
But we still disagree that mind training does or doesn't benefit the community. I think that everyone can become a Buddha. Even my dog. This motivates me to try to help people and be a kind supportive person. That is something I learned through mind training. If you will believe it I used to be a bully in school up until puberty where I was a weakling for awhile. My mind changed through my experiences to the point where I am totally transformed. I used to in elementary school sometimes have a lust for picking on the less popular. I didn't do it every day I am just hard on myself for maybe 10 incidents, but even 10 I had a lust to physically dominate others. I am totally reformed now through my experience. 'Change your mind and the rest will follow..." said a singing group some years ago.
Am I wrong in guessing you don't meditate?? That is directly the concentration spoke of the eightfold path.
Do you believe the eightfold path is just a very successful way to be happy or do you believe that you can be free from suffering 100%? Do you believe that you can achieve jhana through meditation which transforms the mind (though it shouldn't be the goal rather just a tool).
I used to meditate, almost daily, for many years.
Since I chose this secular path (of Buddhism) a few years ago, I've only sat in meditation a few times.
However, I do engage in intentional mindfulness, several times a day, each and every day. For me, it is a better engagement of the mind than meditation is. That could change tomorrow, or next month, or next year- but now this is how things are.
I believe following the 8 fold path, (5) precepts, and regarding the 4 noble truths DOES lead one to several levels of freedom from suffering-
Do I believe anyone and everyone can reach freedom from ALL suffering all the time? No, I don't. Why?
Because it's not easy, it's probably one of the most difficult things any human can do and if done, it won't be until after a devotion of many many years on the Buddhist path -- OR living in a cave.
Do I believe people can reach a true, authentic "enlightenment"?
I don't know. If it does happen, it is so freakin' RARE an occurrence, that we may as well say it doesn't happen often enough to be documented as a real event.
Was the Buddha himself enlightened?
Of course he was.... if you believe he was a real person.
Was he a real person? I don't know - for sure.
Like I've explained, my Buddhism is based much more in practicality, and a lot less in "faith". But I do happen to choose to believe he was real.
Do I believe his mother conceived him by means of a snow white baby elephant in her dreams? Do I believe that lotus blossoms literally sprang up instantaneously from his footsteps? Do I believe he took his first steps just moments after being born?
No... those are religious stories that require a suspension of the belief in reality (and science).
I could go on.... but it's time for dinner and I have company coming over to play cards in a little while! Later tater!
writing is not my strength....from...http://www.ecodharma.com/influences-articles/engaged-buddhism
'Engaged Buddhism is a term which came into use in the Buddhist world in the later part of the twentieth century. It emerged as Buddhist practitioners tried to evolve a practice situated within the social and ecological realities of their times. There are precedents for a socially engaged Buddhism throughout Buddhist history. But it also marks an attempt to reframe Buddhist practice in new historical times – where social agency, social change, citizenship and historical consciousness became important characteristics of modern life.
Engaged Buddhism can be understood as an expression of interconnectedness. Buddhist thought suggests that life is an intricate web of interconnections, in Thich Nhat Hahn’s words, we all “inter-are”. This means that every event – near or far, past or present is to do with us. We are connected with it and our response to it can help to heal or perpetuate its dis-ease. Each and every situation – locally and globally is an opportunity for compassion, for generosity, for truth and for equanimity.
......To avoid a discussion that goes round on circles, Jones writes: “It usually comes down in discussion as to what “engagement” means. This is why I prefer “SOCIALLY engaged Buddhism” This social engagement can take many forms which span from activism and campaigning, to social, educational and care work. Engaged Buddhists working in all these fields seek to explore how their practice can inform and find expression through this work.'
Social = populations. The opposite of secluded....or by yourself...... << mine
don't you think?
Do what works, by all means. We all have different ways of doing
things.....I'm all over this thread, because It's one of my passions....and
I look forward to talking/discussing any and all ideas that have to
do with it.
You could perform wrong actions in a social
way/setting. You kinda lost me there. Sorry...
So it is not cool to spread a notion of shame on people who are not able to engage.
For the record, shame is not my intention.
If for whatever reasons, through no fault of your
own you cant socially engage....don't.
Start a thread about
the other ways to engage. Ways that are not social.
Why should I be made to feel ashamed about the path
I'm active on?....and have to walk away from a thread about
SOCIAL issues. This is tripping me out here....I'm going to cook
dinner...
@Jeffrey,
There was a distinction made regarding those who don't engage and those who can't (for whatever reason) engage.... again, I think you might be forgetting some of the earlier posts in this thread.
Sorry @Jeffrey....I need to practice more patience.
Thanks @MaryAnne for setting a good example...
Dharmic friends are helpful but are not the whole story of the path.
If amongst ordinary hedonistic people, a Buddhist adopts such worldly values, the path has already been abandoned. This applies as much to the laity as monastics.
If amongst worldly hedonistic people, a Buddhist sees the suffering endemic in those worldly hedonistic values then any ground beneath his or her feet will be the path.
I think that the ease or difficulty in staying on the path always depends more on what you value than what anyone else values. If the Dharma was only visable as the Dharma within the confines of cloistered conditions, then we have to start spelling it with a small "d".
We are often lost in the movies of our mind. There's a Zen story about a hermit monk who painted a tiger on the walls of his cave. He painted it so realistically that when he finished, he looked at it and became frightened. It takes practice to wake up, to emerge from our mind-created worlds.
That is what movies are. For that moment we are transported into the delights of a make-believe world. It is tough enough as it is to break away from the passionate engagement from the "real" world with all the attendant stories.
It seems an almost insurmountable task to work toward a better world without ending up in a battle of "us versus them" which is hardly conducive to non-Duality and compassion for all.
Even if you have the best of intentions, trying to change the wrongs of the world means eventually seeing the truth that these wrongs are caused or at least maintained by a small group of selfish, powerful, rich people. Being socially engaged means looking at a town being sucked dry of its last water and knowing there is a room full of rich businessmen who know this but care more about profits from fracking. They have their justifications, of course, and are no better or worse than most people in the world, but who really cares about the suffering of the slave owner when you hear the cries of the slaves?
So socially engaged means ending up in a never ending battle, and the world already has enough warriors on either side. There is a good reason why Buddhism has tried to stay above it all so its not part of the problem, even if it's not much of a solution.
Don't forget the Buddhist monks involved in the ethnic purging of Muslims from Myanmar believe they're being socially engaged, and who can dispute that? They see this as defending their society against an evil. In their case, social engagement has been infected by hatred and bigotry.
So what do you folks think? Are we trying to turn Buddhism into something it simply can't handle without destroying something that makes it unique?
mindful of this possible state of duality that can be created in the
process. The way I have tried to approach causes is not to be
against something or someone but for something or someone.
Like...I'm not against war...I'm for peace. I'm not against set views
from a time gone by....I'm for civil rights for everyone. I'm not
against people wanting to be straight...I'm for people being
lawfully able to sleep with who they want. I'm not against people
making money...I'm for everyone having enough to eat. I have never
considered myself an angry protester...(well, maybe the last KKK march got
me a little heated), hahah. Of course, there are times that I may not
be able to keep it in frame...but that can go for anyone, anywhere.
Even in a cave.
The Myanmar example? Well...to be honest, I don't know enough
about both sides to comment....but it seems extremely more
complicated than I can solve. I'm for them both learning to live
together. (That's the best I can do on that one).
Yes, it's a big task....but I owe it to my children.....who are
black....and who's generations not too long ago were treated
inhuman. Beaten and hung from trees. Slavery may have been
outlawed...but it just got pushed in the closet. It's alive as ever.
Just as [we] find animal rights important (we don't eat them)...
human rights are also important.
These practices may not be for everyone...just as the cave and
sitting for days at a time may not be for everyone....Maybe it's
just door #81,000.
Below is the mission of Tzu Chi: http://tw.tzuchi.org/en/
I only brought up my stats because people seem to think it
can only be one way or another.
This thread seems to have had everyone feeling/acting defensive....
including me. I'm going to call it a day on this one....
Love, peace, and hair grease
It is difficult to learn enough of the Buddha's teachings to give definitive answers to questions. There are many schools
and many subjects. I find real pleasure in the varied replies I find here in this group. I have been a Buddhist since 1965.
I have read a lot and meditated a lot but I know I am still just a lay person-a householder. I try to do a good job and speak up only when I am sure I understand. Of course I still err.
I write in economics and history and I know the subjects pretty well. I am not just a layperson. And yet I know the subjects are complex and easily misconstrued. The specialized languages of Science and Economics and History are much like the various lineages of Buddhism. I follow
the Nyingma tradition because it teaches most of the various paths. I try to take the large picture and encompass the whole subject and relate each to the next. This is not easy.
While I respect the Buddhist teachings and I want to see them applied to the world and especially here in America where it is so easy and so valuable and needed. I realize it is easy to
speak high mindedly and grasp after high ideals while going in the wrong direction because of a failure to fully grasp the terrain. In America the terrain is the Constitution. America is a Republic. America is a nation of laws-not strictly a Democracy. If one has not read the eightfold path or the four noble truths or the three ignorances which cause bewilderment one is not in a position to speak with authority about the Buddha's teachings. Then you talk about your experiences and your gains and aspirations and you ask questions. Strangely people who have never read the Constitution feel they are authorities about American Politics.
They judge conditions by their feelings or aspirations or personal agenda and advise others on very little understanding. The first Paramita is Liberality and that includes giving the good to the other, coming down on the side of people and correcting mistaken teachings. That should also be the way in the relationships of our nation.
It is our liberty and our rule of law that Makes America work so well. We are a classless society-more than any other. We are a generous nation more so as a % of income than any other people (less so in the last 50 years). Our Constitution
and our laws are the source of our greatness. Our free people create wealth, upward mobility and well being like no other nation in the history of the world. We are Equal under the law.
The powerful state has never been a source of blessings or well being for many for long. The unbridled state crushes it's people and wages cruel war on other peoples. That is why our founding fathers formed a Republic. A nation of laws
with checks on state power and a balance between the powers. We are losing that and we are losing it in the name of doing good, being fair and securing an equal outcome for all. The equal outcome of state power has always-most every time-been a lessening of well being of most all and the ascendency of a few. I know this is not what you want and it is not what most Buddhists want. Wouldn't it be sad if we made great efforts with high minded aspirations and all got together and pushed in the wrong direction. Saying high minded things is not the same as accomplishing high minded goals. Promoting generosity is not being generous. I here a fabulously wealthy man say over and over again 'rich people should pay more taxes' . He is right. Rich people should.
That rich man made hundred of millions of dollars last year and only paid taxes on about 1/2 of his income. On the other 1/2 of his income he paid about .6 % that is less than 1 %. If he wants the billionaires to pay more he can just right a check. He can stop using the tax laws to duck most all of his taxes. He speaks high words but he dirty deals. Most really wealthy people pay little in taxes because the code is corrupt. What would the Buddha say? The issues are complex.
Before we support groups and issues we should make the effort to learn about the basic elements. Like the eightfold path and the noble truths. Those are the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence.... Before we speak against or support we should learn a little history. We should understand some economics. We should look at all sides and
judge rightly. Why are we equal under the law? That is the 14th amendment. Who passed it? When was it passed.
Why does Justice Thurgood Marshall the Supreme court justice say: we people of color cherish the 13, 14, and 15th amendments? When were those passed? Who did that?
If we are duped because we are ignorant it won't be surprising if we lose our liberties. It's easy to be better informed. If we as Buddhists are going to get involved
in the politics and issues of our nation we should do so responsibly. I think we should be involved. We should be informed. Our nation needs our wisdom and our ability to rise above our petty personal benefits and do what is right for most of the people with all of our efforts.
I hope to continue in this group. I feel useful and I have learned. I find people to admire and I feel part of a like minded group. Like your religion your politics is your choice-
at least for the time being. I hope you and our fellow participants wield that choice with wisdom and with knowledge. Start with the Constitution and it's history. You can easily find everything on the net.
Thank you for your services and your fine site.
Dennis
I didn't really get much from your post. (many of us aren't Americans).
While it's not a problem for me, the statement you made above is very likely to cause considerable offence among our Theravedan membership.
It is about stillness.
From the still comes our movement towards an idealisation.
I once met a teaching dervish who literally as a Westerner went to meditate in a cave, he came down met a teacher and engaged with the world again. Sometimes these behaviours are temporary.
What is the purpose of living a focussed, one pointed, extreme devotion to practice and enlightenment lifestyle in a Himalayan cave? It is simply the intention to increase the likelihood of realisation. Once realised, then what?
Then what is required to alleviate suffering? What does that entail? Still know? Still fishing?
As a dharma alter ego advocate, we can all be inspired by the real life sacrifices of our heroes:
Robin: "Where'd you get a live fish, Batman?"
Batman: "The true crimefighter always carries everything he needs in his utility belt, Robin."
http://adamwest.tripod.com/b-lectur.htm
1. I foolishly assumed all of the American English meant this was an American site. Also I was replying to the article which seems pretty American. I will try to make fewer assumptions.
I know they are part of delusion and unworthy.
2. It has been my view that Hinayana Buddhist mostly withdraw from society and let the "other" to what they do.
The Mahayana however engages. Since that is challenged by the actions of the Theravadins in this group that is obviously a foolish assumption. I meant as a great vehicle practioner we do enlightening activities and Hinayana concentrates on being enlightened. I guess I got that from the Avatamsaka Sutra.
I will try to do better. Your help is appreciated.
I meant no harm. May the good be yours.
Thailand doesn't seem like a very happy place and I might have gotten the wrong idea. P.S. I don't try to convert others
I mostly just reach out to them and try to help lessen suffering. Sometimes I share Buddha quotes. If I see a reach I share more. It is my view that it is very hard to change hearts or "convert others" I spare myself that failure. No Christians (including my own family), come to me and ask for my help in becoming a Buddhist-except maybe on this site. My wife is a Catholic and I am proud of her.
Jayantha, I'm sorry you left the Libertarian group. I recently read Rothbard and he makes a lot of sense-although I am not
a Libertarian I see a lot of value in their activities. I hope they prosper. America is struggling with a growing push to take away our liberties. Well, I hope you succeed in your current
plans.
I apologize to those Theravadins whom I offended.
May the good be yours.
It's nice to bring emptiness and skillful means into your life and experience a little more bliss and light but I think it is the selfless reaching out to others that is the demonstration of enlightenment. The development of Bodhicitta is a gradient activity. It's true that there is sometimes a great leap like Atiyoga, Dzogchen, and the Anuttara teachings speak of, but
those are flowers on the path. The enlightened path is Realization and the peace that develops from dropping the self grasping. I hope you will re assess your comment and look to your growth as an extension of your capacities as an enlightening and enlightened being. Perfection is down the road-somewhere-and isn't really the Buddha's point. He started out just noticing the suffering of others and right then enlightenment was in his heart. Modesty which does not come from self realization is pretty useless. Yours seems pretty fine and uplifting. That doesn't mean you are not enlightened. Peace be yours.
That being said, what i seem to see a lot in this thread is a degradation or a lessening of the importance of personal practice. I think this comes from a misunderstanding many people have regarding the theravada being about self only and maya/vaj being about others.
The buddha, in the pali suttas, viewed the HIGHEST thing you can do for others is to destroy your own attachment/aversion/ignorance(3 roots) , because this gives a gift of fearlessness to all beings and brings about a more beneficial life for yourself and those around you.
I personally experience this to be very true. More true then the concept of the bodisattva, which makes less sense to me, simply because life shows me that people can truely only change and help themselves, and the way to a true fantasy utopia is for everyone to practice and live dhamma, not some people who are filled with the three roots saving others with the three roots.
Now that being said. I have also been an activist and have a strong sense of justice and making a better life for the people. This lead me to at one point being the chair forthe southern half of my state in the Libertarian party. I hit the streets many a time including deep in some of the dangerous cities to try and educate people about their rights etc. Ive always been educated and politically active since being a teenager. Ive also always had a strong sense of dana.
The more i got into my practice i began to see cycles in politics and social activies. As a student of history i know history repeats itself. You cant REALLY make lasting change in this world.. Except in youself. I got out of politics and have been gradually retreating from what most people consider normal actives, and moving towards renunciation.
Now that being said, i actually feel i will be able to help the most people as a monastic. I want to live in a cave by myself and meditate, but i also know my practice, skills, and experience can benefit many people "with little dust in their eyes", who are searching like i was.
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".
Nice comment and lovely quote. Another Francis quote is
"All saints teach the same thing." This has guided me often.
Thank you.
Hi> I like your comment. However, I think sitting in a cave detached fro everything misses out on Bodhicitta and most of the Paramitas. I'm not sure that is the fast route to enlightenment. I'm also not sure that that type of detachment is so easy. I have meditated 12 hours a day for quite a while-single point meditation. I got terrific insights and felt I could read people's body motion with great accuracy. But I soon wanted to get back out and engage.
The enlightened mind sort of demands engagement.
You don't have to be some brazen hero, saving people from certain doom to help alleviate the suffering in the world.
There are no small acts of kindness, my friend.
_/\_
This is a strange comment. Are you a Buddhist? Buddhist
texts don't promote the slaughter of any minority or majority
of non Buddhists. On the other hand Muslims do and the Koran does-I've studied it. The sword verses are very clear.
History is also very clear. When the Muslims took over India
around 800AD they tortured and mutilated the Hindus but they slaughtered all Buddhists. This is common known policy of Islamic states. Pushing out or even killing people who are determined to wipe out you and your family and friends to the last person is not hatred and bigotry? Try survival.
You say you think conflict is necessary well sometimes it is. In defense of your whole people it is not called hatred and bigotry. It's called the struggle to stay alive. Most current
Islamic States got that way by military take over and slaughter of everyone who didn't convert. History is plain.
Maybe you should be asking more questions. If you disagree with this I will happily share chapter and verse and historical dates. This is not a moot point. I actually I don't see much virtue in the rest of your commentary either. You could try asking more questions. Reading. And spending less time with nasty minded comedians.
Dont forget we are talking about Buddhism .
The ultimate goal is to escape samsara. Not to help make the world a better place. If even the Buddha could not solve the world's problems, what makes you think you can do better? The dhutanga practice is encouraged if one is so inclined.
You cannot give the world what you dont have. There are many people in this world who tries to help change the world for the better. Yet they cant even control their own attachments and temper.
It is nice to say I want to be a socially engaged Buddhist. But have you worked on your own mind?
It is better to master your own mind than to conquer a thousand armies.
~ Buddha.
If we do not understand that we are taught, by the Buddha's own example, to be engaged with the pain and suffering of the world, we understand nothing of his life and work. Consider this: he achieved Enlightenment and could have chosen, we are told, to "go beyond" (whatever that might mean). After long consideration he chose to enter into dialogue with others and to Turn the Wheel of Dharma. We may not have his power of teaching but we are bound, on the Noble Eightfold Path, to do that which is in our power for others/