Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Organisational work, teaching, Sunday school syllabus, charitable work, outreach, sharing of resources, artwork, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Alobha
Posts: 565
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:27 pm
Location: Germany

Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by Alobha »

Hey everyone :smile:

This is a question about the skillful means of talking to non-buddhists about well, wisdom and living skillfully in general.
I believe I (and I guess other buddhists around here) may easily remember this or that sutta, this or that buddhist story when we talk with friends or relatives about topics like dealing with anger and sadness, death, sickness, general attitude towards things, how to communicate etc...
Those buddhist wisdoms easily pop into mind and certainly apply: but how do you convey them so that the other person understands the core of it?
There's a few things I'm wondering about:

1. Is it better to avoid making any reference to the buddha or the buddhist origins of these wisdoms, even at the risk of "watering down" the message by simplyfying concepts?
2. Or to say it the other way around: Is it of any benefit to use buddhist terminology and buddhist references when talking to nonbuddhists? Nonbuddhists may already be put off when one says that it's a story from the Buddha; it's just a frame that might lead to reactance with people who have prejudices or a negative attitude towards religion or buddhism.

Personally I feel that when it comes to the choice of words and the skillful means, two things play a role: One is that the core of wisdom is universal so stripping away buddhist labels should not matter. On the other side deliberately stripping stories and advice from the buddhist background makes me feel like it may not be a very authentic thing to do. There's nothing to be ashamed of by praising the Buddha or saying that he taught many great things; it would just be for the sake of making people more comfortable with the content of it all.

So what do you think?
Content over Authenticity? Is that even an issue?

Input appreciated!
Best wishes,
Alobha
User avatar
Wri
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:45 am
Location: United States

Re: Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by Wri »

I found that people will listen to and accept the message much more when you avoid saying it's Buddhist or use well known Buddhist terminology like karma or rebirth. It doesn't seem to me to have much to do with Right Speech but more about the closed mindedness and attachment to views that other people have. They hear Buddhism and go "oh right, THAT stuff. Well Buddhism can't be right because I'm such and such and I believe this and that." But I find if you give them the exact same message without the Buddhist labeling, they will accept the view and think of it as highly realistic and pragmatic, and sometimes they will marvel at how science is supporting the claims you're making, or share some kind of experience that they or someone they knew had that matches up. Obviously a lot of the labeling cannot be avoided conveniently. They know where meditation practice comes from. They know you have a Buddha statue. They know you wear a mala, etc etc.

The important thing to remember is your intention here, and this is where Right Speech comes into play. Why are you trying to teach them Buddhism? Are you approaching them? This is likely not advised. If they approach you with a willingness to learn about Buddhism, then you should teach. But going around preaching to people does not seem to earn much respect. I don't advise advertising one's Buddhism around to non-Buddhists. Just live your practice and let that be an example. If someone asks why you're like that, just say you studied Buddhism. Let it carry on from there.
Keep your mind steady and rest within the winds of experience.
May I show unconditional love to all beings.
User avatar
Alobha
Posts: 565
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:27 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by Alobha »

Wri wrote:I found that people will listen to and accept the message much more when you avoid saying it's Buddhist or use well known Buddhist terminology like karma or rebirth. It doesn't seem to me to have much to do with Right Speech but more about the closed mindedness and attachment to views that other people have. They hear Buddhism and go "oh right, THAT stuff. Well Buddhism can't be right because I'm such and such and I believe this and that." But I find if you give them the exact same message without the Buddhist labeling, they will accept the view and think of it as highly realistic and pragmatic, and sometimes they will marvel at how science is supporting the claims you're making, or share some kind of experience that they or someone they knew had that matches up. Obviously a lot of the labeling cannot be avoided conveniently. They know where meditation practice comes from. They know you have a Buddha statue. They know you wear a mala, etc etc.
good points, thanks. Your observations are very similar to mine. :smile:
I don't advise advertising one's Buddhism around to non-Buddhists. Just live your practice and let that be an example. If someone asks why you're like that, just say you studied Buddhism. Let it carry on from there.
That's sound advice in general and I do it like this. It's a bit of a different case here though. I'm not intending to spread buddhism per sé, but to help people and spend time on things that I truly value. That's living practice, too. I live in an environment where people are lost in consumerism and the idea that worldy gains are the best and only way to happiness. I see a lot of people both in my closer social circle as well as in the wider western culture that are simply lost in one way or the other. They have no role models, no ideals to strive for, no concepts how to make sense of and troubled with what to make of it. So i'm concerned with the question what I could do and how I could do it. If I'll cut back the buddhist terminology and end up not talking about "buddhism" but about life and wisdom without using religious terminology, then that's fine by me. It certainly seems like a sound approach to me to do it like that ;)
User avatar
Wri
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:45 am
Location: United States

Re: Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by Wri »

Alobha wrote:I'm not intending to spread buddhism per sé, but to help people and spend time on things that I truly value. That's living practice, too. I live in an environment where people are lost in consumerism and the idea that worldy gains are the best and only way to happiness. I see a lot of people both in my closer social circle as well as in the wider western culture that are simply lost in one way or the other. They have no role models, no ideals to strive for, no concepts how to make sense of and troubled with what to make of it. So i'm concerned with the question what I could do and how I could do it. If I'll cut back the buddhist terminology and end up not talking about "buddhism" but about life and wisdom without using religious terminology, then that's fine by me. It certainly seems like a sound approach to me to do it like that ;)
Well it's not exactly our place to change people's lives for them, precisely because bringing them these messages when they aren't ready will usually have them ignoring the message, being turned off by it when they need it later, or even hating the idea of Buddhism and the people that follow it. They may listen, but if they honestly believe that consumerism will make them happy, they will do that. When it inevitably causes them difficulty, or disappointment, or the mid-life crisis, or some other existential bewilderment, then it would be more effective to nudge the in a better direction.

Often times it can be more harmful to approach people we see as foolish or whatever we would call it from our "superior" position and try and change their life because we know what's right for them. What makes us want to do this? Is it our compassion or our ego? Is it helpful or harmful? This is why we merely serve as an example until we are asked for help. Until we are enlightened, I don't think, personally, that it is our duty to go about trying to change people. Simply show them a better way by example. That's enough. If they ask for help, give them practical, honest advice based on YOUR own experience. Don't tell them they need to do something. Just give them options. And yes, I have been told off about these things when I was just starting to get into Buddhism. I had that urge for some time to explain Buddhism, defend Buddhism, and establish my "Buddhosity". In time I saw this as unnecessary and rather foolish.

Sometimes you need to :hug: and other times you need to :popcorn: . But people usually don't like you to :soap:
Keep your mind steady and rest within the winds of experience.
May I show unconditional love to all beings.
User avatar
puppha
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 8:56 pm
Location: London, UK

Re: Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by puppha »

Wri wrote:Sometimes you need to :hug: and other times you need to :popcorn: . But people usually don't like you to :soap:
That's a nice and graphic way to put it! I fully agree with it.
For a discussion to be useful, both participants must be ready to listen a lot. Very few people would be happy when someone come up to them and tell them they are wrong.
My approach is now to answer questions if people ask questions, may be offer some pointers like books, websites and addresses if they appear interested. But if they don't appear interested or don't ask questions, I leave the subject aside. The reason is that if the person in front of me has not developed at least a kindle of interest, he will likely not listen to me and probably be irritated by what I have to say; so what would be the benefit?

With Metta
SarathW
Posts: 21238
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by SarathW »

Hi Alobha
I can't give a direct answer to your question as no one has approached me to learn about Buddhism.
At the very beginning I try to share my knowledge with my Buddhist friends and relatives.
I got a very cold response from many of them.
I think we should try to practice as much as we can, rather than trying to teach others.
There are enough materials available for anyone who wish to learn about Buddhism.
There are many internet Dhamma discussion groups where we can learn an share our knowledge.
I enjoy sharing my knowledge with my Dhamma Wheel friends. :thanks:

I recently started a meditation programme in my residence and invited Buddhist and non-Buddhist friends.
I was very clear in my invitation that the meditation programme is based on Buddhist meditation methods.
I got one response from one non-Buddhist and few more from my Buddhist friends.

I like the teaching style of Joseph Goldstein.
Perhaps you should follow his approach.
I use his Dhamma discussions in our meditation programme.

http://www.dharmaseed.org/teacher/96/talk/6162/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

PS: Alobha, are you a monk?
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Cormac Brown
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2013 10:10 am

Re: Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by Cormac Brown »

This sutta clears up some of the points raised in this topic: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

In it, the Buddha explains that if you care for your own and others' welfare you should practice the precepts and encourage others to keep the precepts, too. People mightn't like it if you advise them to keep the precepts, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. I used to drink and take drugs, and even though I mightn't have liked people advising me against it then, I wish more people had tried to stop me. I'm just grateful that I was raised in a relatively sober environment by my parents.

Unfortunately, a culture has arisen in which it's seen as socially improper to advise people on keeping the Five Precepts, particularly on the fifth, the breaking of which can lead to the falling apart of the other four.

If we really want to exercise our goodwill and compassion, we shouldn't let cold responses discourage us from advising those around us to keep the Five Precepts. It could save them from terrible misfortune.
Alobha wrote:Is it better to avoid making any reference to the buddha or the buddhist origins of these wisdoms
I prefer not to hide the "Buddhist" aspects. I think they have more credence if people know they're from the Buddha, rather than me! Plus, they make most sense in the context of Right View - i.e. belief in the next life, and in the context of relieving suffering. Further, it might encourage them to go and look up the Buddha's teaching. Lastly, if you don't reference the Buddha, and he's your source, it's...not best academic practice, shall we say.
“I in the present who am a worthy one, rightly self-awakened, am a
teacher of action, a teacher of activity, a teacher of persistence. But the
worthless man Makkhali contradicts even me, (saying,) ‘There is no
action. There is no activity. There is no persistence.’ "
AN 3.138, trans. Ven. Thanissaro
dagon
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:45 am

Re: Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by dagon »

Alobha wrote:Hey everyone :smile:

This is a question about the skillful means of talking to non-buddhists about well, wisdom and living skillfully in general.
I believe I (and I guess other buddhists around here) may easily remember this or that sutta, this or that buddhist story when we talk with friends or relatives about topics like dealing with anger and sadness, death, sickness, general attitude towards things, how to communicate etc...
Those buddhist wisdoms easily pop into mind and certainly apply: but how do you convey them so that the other person understands the core of it?
There's a few things I'm wondering about:

1. Is it better to avoid making any reference to the buddha or the buddhist origins of these wisdoms, even at the risk of "watering down" the message by simplyfying concepts?
2. Or to say it the other way around: Is it of any benefit to use buddhist terminology and buddhist references when talking to nonbuddhists? Nonbuddhists may already be put off when one says that it's a story from the Buddha; it's just a frame that might lead to reactance with people who have prejudices or a negative attitude towards religion or buddhism.

Personally I feel that when it comes to the choice of words and the skillful means, two things play a role: One is that the core of wisdom is universal so stripping away buddhist labels should not matter. On the other side deliberately stripping stories and advice from the buddhist background makes me feel like it may not be a very authentic thing to do. There's nothing to be ashamed of by praising the Buddha or saying that he taught many great things; it would just be for the sake of making people more comfortable with the content of it all.

So what do you think?
Content over Authenticity? Is that even an issue?

Input appreciated!
Best wishes,
Alobha
The first thing to remember is that you are trying to communicate - the most important element in effectively communicating is listening. It is very easy to assign the difficulties to the other person but you are the one trying to convey a message.

This from a how to sell site -
1.You give a person who needs more time to formulate a response the time to do so.
2.You learn something new.
3.You demonstrate that you care about a viewpoint other than your own.
4.You demonstrate patience.
5.You become a team player.
6.You get to ‘see’ how they make decisions. (and in sales, this knowledge is key)
7.You prevent yourself from jumping to conclusions or making assumptions.
8.You consider what you say before you actually say it.
9.You broaden (rather than narrow) the discussion.
10.You ask better questions (and handle objections with ease).
11.You encourage others to talk to you when they have a problem or conflict.
12.You show support.
13.You avoid careless mistakes.
14.You make smarter decisions.
15.You become a source of energy for others.
16.You demonstrate humility.
17.You are ‘present’.
18.You come closer to perfecting the art of conversation.

Listening is a skill and discipline that can easily be instilled in your work. Think about situations that would profit from a “pause” and make a conscious effort to allow that pause to happen.

Remember: Selling is mostly listening.
http://www.salesengine.com/sales/what-c ... listening/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The first step had to be to establish a rapport

metta
dagon
SarathW
Posts: 21238
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by SarathW »

Hi Dagon
The way I understand Dhamma is giving not selling.
:shrug:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
dagon
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2013 12:45 am

Re: Skillful means: teaching non-buddhists

Post by dagon »

SarathW wrote:Hi Dagon
The way I understand Dhamma is giving not selling.
:shrug:
No it is not selling - it is giving - but that is it even harder in a materialistic world.

It is giving something of immeasurable value and trying to get others to see the value of it.

However we need to apply the best communication skills we can. This is even more true in stressful situations as identified in the OP.

metta
dagon
Post Reply