Traditions and ideology

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Dan74 »

I see (I think...)

Maybe. 84000 teachings for 84000 diseases, eh?

There are many different takes on samsara, different personality types. It is only natural that different approaches and flavours would crystallise to deal with this diversity. What's good for the goose, maybe good for the gander but the chickens and turkeys will be none the wiser, not to mention the pigs.

So this notion of one pure Buddhism to rule them all which I've seen in the past, is neither feasible nor desirable, in my view.

Even in maths, we have different texts often with quite different approaches to the same subject and some prefer to work with one while others prefer another. How much more so with the Dhamma which draws on all of us, rather than just the logic and the intellect.

So to me, it is about the diversity of human condition that explains the continuation of the diversity of Dhamma.
_/|\_
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Dan,

Are then the differences in the present day to be accounted for by 84,000 different personality types gravitating towards 84,000 different outward manifestations of those personality types, each possessing its own evolutionary derived mode through which it best connects to the Dhamma?

:?:

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Kim OHara »

retrofuturist wrote:Is there a way to explain the differences as they present themselves in a very real and tangible fashion today, without having to trace back through the evolutionary path of Buddhist history without recourse to Buddhist Councils, schisms and such?

Are the received differences, as they present themselves today, differences in ideology?
Hi, Retro,
As I tried to say before, I don't think you add anything to the discussion by framing it in terms of ideology.
You can say that today we have ducks and geese. You can, if you like, trace the forces which led to their divergence - but if you don't feel like doing that (and it seems that you don't) then we simply have ducks and geese. 'Ideology' implies a coherence and purposiveness ("The main purpose behind an ideology is to offer either change in society, or adherence to a set of ideals where conformity already exists, through a normative thought process. Ideologies are systems of abstract thought applied to public matters and thus make this concept central to politics. Implicitly every political or economic tendency entails an ideology whether or not it is propounded as an explicit system of thought.") that was never present in the evolutionary drift of any of schools away from the Buddha's direct teachings or away from each other, and 'ideology' is not how any of the schools sees its worldview now. Why drag it in?
:shrug:

Kim
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Dan74 »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Dan,

Are then the differences in the present day to be accounted for by 84,000 different personality types gravitating towards 84,000 different outward manifestations of those personality types, each possessing its own evolutionary derived mode through which it best connects to the Dhamma?

:?:

Metta,
Retro. :)
Yes, but I am sure history has played a part too - as always it is the interaction of historical, social and psychological forces, isn't it? And you can't separate the three.

84000 is not to be taken literally, right?

Also "evolutionary derived" or kammic or through nature-nurture inteaction...

My belief as I guess you know is that great masters of different times and places have discerned the core of the Buddha's teaching through insight and realisation and having absorbed and assimilated the teachings have made them their own. And so rather than repeating "dead words" they spoke using their own words with the force of their living energy and experience and of course the insight of liberation. So we have Suttas and Sutras, shastras, commentaries, koans, termas, etc etc Some seem more insightful, some seem less when filtered through our own particular slant and predilection.
_/|\_
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Kim,
Kim O'Hara wrote:'ideology' is not how any of the schools sees its worldview now.
So it's different "worldviews" they have then?
Kim O'Hara wrote:Why drag it in? :shrug:
For the same reason you dragged "world-views" in... i.e. in an attempt to clearly articulate what the actual differences are.

I'm not wedded to the word "ideology"... it just seemed from the Wikipedia definition to be a reasonably sensible way to explain the differences to me, but if others saw it differently, I was keen to see what those different means of representation were. I'm happy to jettison "ideology" as a grounds for differentiation if something else is better. Let's consider worldview then...
Wikipedia entry on wordview wrote:A comprehensive world view (or worldview) is the fundamental cognitive orientation of an individual or society encompassing the entirety of the individual or society's knowledge and point-of-view, including natural philosophy; fundamental, existential, and normative postulates; or themes, values, emotions, and ethics.[1] The term is a calque of the German word Weltanschauung [ˈvɛlt.ʔanˌʃaʊ.ʊŋ] ( listen), composed of Welt ('world') and Anschauung ('view' or 'outlook').[2] It is a concept fundamental to German philosophy and epistemology and refers to a wide world perception. Additionally, it refers to the framework of ideas and beliefs through which an individual, group or culture interprets the world and interacts with it.

A worldview is a network of presuppositions which is not verified by the procedures of natural science but in terms of which every aspect of man’s knowledge and experience is interpreted and interrelated
World-view seems a worthy subtitute to ideology to me.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Dan,
Dan74 wrote:Yes, but I am sure history has played a part too - as always it is the interaction of historical, social and psychological forces, isn't it? And you can't separate the three.
I agree those are all factors, though with the communications revolution, the historical and social influences are arguably diminishing relative to the psychological forces, in the context of the modern Buddhist world.
Dan74 wrote:84000 is not to be taken literally, right?
Feel free to replace "84,000" with "a shed-load". :D
Dan74 wrote:Also "evolutionary derived" or kammic or through nature-nurture inteaction...
I wasn't really separating them as such, I just meant as they evolved over time. Arguably, "evolutionary forces" is a blanket statement intend to capture all the actual forces (kammic, physical, other niyamas) that played out over time.
Dan74 wrote:My belief as I guess you know is that great masters of different times and places have discerned the core of the Buddha's teaching through insight and realisation and having absorbed and assimilated the teachings have made them their own. And so rather than repeating "dead words" they spoke using their own words with the force of their living energy and experience and of course the insight of liberation. So we have Suttas and Sutras, shastras, commentaries, koans, termas, etc etc Some seem more insightful, some seem less when filtered through our own particular slant and predilection.
Understood. And with the increasing emphasis on psychological "predilection" and the veritable smorgasboard of traditions available, it's decreasingly relevant to speak of traditions in the traditional geographical sense, or via their evolutionary path, but to speak of them increasingly in terms of (as you said) personality, predilection and (as Kim said) worldview. As a non-Korean following a path brought to you to Melbourne via Korea, you yourself are a product of this "modern Buddhism" which needn't be explained in the traditional historical way via recourse to Councils, schisms et.al.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Dan74 »

Yes, Councils and schisms (if even real) are not really relevant to me but Pali Buddhism is.

Tradition is also relevant, in my view, because it is the quality control, the reference point. There are the texts and the senior teachers that are meant to ensure that individual teachers don't go off track or if and when that happens to help them come back and also also warn their students. As an anecdote, a fellow teacher of Buddhist RE here is a student of a student of Geshe Michael Roach. She is a lovely lady who is now teaching my son, and though GMR appears to me to be a case in point, here we are...

Hmm... traditions are bigger than personality and no matter what traditions some thing will grate on you. I don't know. I suppose I could've easily been a student of Ajahn Sumedho or perhaps Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. It has a lot to do with circumstance or kamma, if you will.
Last edited by Dan74 on Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
_/|\_
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Kim OHara »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Kim,

...
World-view seems a worthy subtitute to ideology to me.

Metta,
Retro. :)
Good. I think it's a more realistic term. But I really must leave you guys to it for a while because there are other (less fun) things I ought to be doing - raking lawns, sweeping floors, stuff like that ...

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Dan74 wrote:Hmm... traditions are bigger than personality
And arguably that general relationship not holding true at a particular point in time is how new traditions come to be formed (but that isn't necessarily a bad thing).

An example that comes to mind is the conflict that has arisen as a result of bhikkhuni ordination and how the situation is viewed differently by conservatives and progressives within the broader Thai Forest tradition. Interestingly, some may feel that they remain part of the Thai Forest tradition, yet others within the Thai Forest tradition might regard certain segments that have gone against "tradition" somewhat differently.

Tradition, as distinct to lineage, seems to have a far more subjective quality to it. It seems more to do with community and identification, and through identification, you're likely to do things in a way that shares parallels with others who self-identify with that group too.

It's all quite complicated, yet here we are... along with traditions.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Dan74 »

retrofuturist wrote: It's all quite complicated, yet here we are... along with traditions.

Metta,
Retro. :)
Indeed!
_/|\_
Cafael Dust
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Cafael Dust »

Could the Bodhisattva ideal have something to do with cultural differences between India and China? India has always had a tradition of holy wanderers, accepting the benefits to society of such a person as given and without need of outlining, whereas Chinese sages, e.g. Lao Tzu, Confucius, have always had to justify their existence and maintenance by reference to the needs of their community? So Mahayana became popular in China and the areas influenced by Chinese thought, since Mahayana Buddhism focuses on, for better or worse, how an enlightened person is useful to others. Whereas Theravada took root in those countries which were influenced by Indian thought; indeed, Thai Buddhism continues with the ideal of the forest dwelling, wandering contemplative, whereas Chan and Zen are more like Western church/monastic communities, with defined responsibilities to the laity.

We tend to characterise Western society as 'free' compared with other cultures, but actually, it is not so much that we are free as that the marketplace is free to assign us flexible roles. We are still expected to demonstrate measurable benefits to our community, hence the perceived threat that the influence of Indian culture posed to our society in the 1960s. This would explain the greater popularity of the Mahayana in the West.

The reason why India accepts the wandering monk as being useful without demanding spreadsheets and cost analysis, is perhaps because India historically has had so many contemplatives who did prove useful, so that confidence in the tradition has become ingrained and no longer requires justifying.
Last edited by Cafael Dust on Fri Apr 13, 2012 10:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Dan74 »

There may be something to your theory, CD, I am not sure. The one thing to note is that Chinese Buddhism has also had a strong forest dwelling, wandering contemplative tradition, so this worldly Mahayana Buddhism notion is quite flawed I think, while Theravada monastics are in some sense more beholden to the community because they completely depend on their dana.
_/|\_
Cafael Dust
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Cafael Dust »

Well, China is a big place, so is India. My theory is necessarily a generalisation. Also, whatever one's ideology, the practical implications of Buddhist practice will often lead to temporary introversion and thus the traditions you refer to.

Dana is not a fixed wage, it's based on the acceptance by the public of supporting monks whose usefulness has not been demonstrated to them. Whereas a Zen priest is paid for specific duties.
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.
User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 4528
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: Switzerland

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Dan74 »

Cafael Dust wrote:Well, China is a big place, so is India. My theory is necessarily a generalisation. Also, whatever one's ideology, the practical implications of Buddhist practice will often lead to temporary introversion and thus the traditions you refer to.

Dana is not a fixed wage, it's based on the acceptance by the public of supporting monks whose usefulness has not been demonstrated to them. Whereas a Zen priest is paid for specific duties.
A Zen priest is a very recent phenomenon that is irrelevant to what you were saying above. I don't follow...

As for unconditional support of monks, this is not the reality from what I've heard.
_/|\_
Cafael Dust
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm

Re: Traditions and ideology

Post by Cafael Dust »

Fair. I'm likely conflating a sketchy knowledge of history with my own cultural stereotypes. I do, however, see some societies as more attached to unambiguously quantifying the material usefulness of religion than others, and there does seem to be a difference between Mahayana and Theravada Buddhism along these lines. Everything I've read about ancient and modern India suggests a deep respect and tolerance for wandering contemplatives as the focus for generosity, indeed as a life to aspire to. Russia has a similar tradition.
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.
Post Reply