Sure, he is not to everyone's taste. But is he "sentimental"? I'm not sure this label is accurate.Paribbajaka wrote:
I've read Anger. I don't dispute that Thich Nhat Hanh can get a little fluffy at times, but he is teaching the Dhamma and it is reaching people who may other wise never reach. I perosnally know many Buddhists who began to practice due to TNH and have since become sincere and dedicated practitioners (I also know many who still hold him as there primary source and are still sincere and dedicated practitioners). Different tastes for different palletes.
When we say that a writer is sentimental, we mean that he or she is trying to drum up a kind of gluey emotional state, as in a corny pop song or bad Victorian poetry.
But I don't see TNH doing this. It seems to me, rather, that he is using the example of motherhood as a teaching tool designed to convey the notion of heedfulness to a secular audience that may include many non-Buddhists.
The intent isn't to summon up dreamy, romantic visions of motherhood but to give a practical analogy that his readers will easily understand. Taking care of an infant or small child requires a great deal of patience and care. And an angry adult is often like an infant or small child.
"Flowery" usually connotes a writing style that is ornate or overloaded with adjectives, but TNH's style is quite plain and uses a simple vocabulary -- again, probably in keeping with the desire to reach a mass audience. And possibly also as a result of translation from Vietnamese.