Spreading Buddhism

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by pink_trike »

Sanghamitta wrote:
pink_trike wrote:The Dharma stands on it's own just fine without the container and institution of Buddhism.
So you would prefer " Dhammaism " ? Its got to be called something. Just calling it the Dhamma, which is essentially what the Buddha did, has no resonance in our culture as it did in his. We cant just talk about " that thing we do " like we are members of the Cosa Nostra.. :smile: I think the attempt not to call Buddhism Buddhism is a bigger waste of energy than any possible danger of instutionalism. As to spreading it, I think example is both the most effective and the most challenging.
The OP asked about the most effective way to evangelize the Dharma. Imo, the most effective way to do this in our modern world would be to drop the "ism" and "ist" impulse that seems to bring many self-identified "Buddhists" comfort and structure. The term "Buddhist" has only very little resonance in our modern global society of 6.5 billion people and is of interest to only a very small number of people. For most folks in the world today it's in the same category as Mayan mysteries, Catholicism, tarot readings, and New Age visualization. Or it's regarded as an indulgence of a certain privileged class. Calling it Buddhist keeps the Dharma in a dark, hidden, archaic, cultural box that most people in modern society have no interest in. This box hides the Dharma under layers of institutionalism, jargon, cultural obfuscation, religiosity, and simulacra. If we're really interested in sharing the Dharma then peeling away the institution, obfuscation, jargon, religiosity, and simulacra is the most effective way. By living according to the teachings and practicing we begin to naturally model the Dharma in our daily life. We'll attract people who are attracted by the presence of the Dharma (truth) in our lives. We can then talk about the Dharma (truth) in ways that they can easily hear and assimilate into their own life...without the cultural froth and unnecessary simulacra.To reach the greatest number of people, it makes sense to speak about our _experience_ of the Dharma (truth) in their language within their cultural reference points, not in some secret society language of abstractification, religiosity, and mystification. The essence of the Truth found in the Buddhist container and institution is a pure wisdom and compassion that transcends all forms of culture, tradition, and language. It can be transfered to any cultural if the overgrowth is weed wacked away. However, this can't be done effectively if we cling to form and structure.

The key to awakening is that no matter how important something is, it must be thrown away. Siddhārtha Gautama didn't talk about "Buddhism", he talked about "The Truth"..."The Law"". It seems like we can do the same...we can simply talk about the experience of Truth. In my experience, this attracts people like ants to honey.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
Sanghamitta
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by Sanghamitta »

I think that people vary and have different needs. You have described what appeals to you. And I am sure that many would agree and will or are finding new ways or different ways to present the essentials. I dont require any different way. I am not alone in that. I belong to a very traditional group within a very traditional Sangha setting with a large " "congregation" of several hundred people, many of them young. Just a few weeks ago there was an open day and in terms of numbers and in terms of hunger for something substantial, ants to honey would be a fair way to describe the attendence. I think you may be underestimating the fact that people are very different in their needs pink trike.
From the time I first became interested in the Buddhadhamma it was only the traditional forms of that which interested me. I am part of a large Sangha which is represented by a wide cross section of the population in terms of social and income groups etc, and we all have that in common. I would not dream of denying the validity of less traditional ways to present the Dhamma per se. I think it is not asking too much to expect a degree of mutual respect.
:anjali:
Last edited by Sanghamitta on Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by pink_trike »

Sanghamitta wrote: I am sure we can agree to differ in a mutually respectful way.

:anjali:
Yes. I think we have.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
Sanghamitta
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by Sanghamitta »

Sorry I did a bit of editing while you were posting yours P T. :thinking:


:anjali:

Valerie.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
User avatar
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by pink_trike »

mikenz66 wrote:
pink_trike wrote:The Dharma stands on it's own just fine without the container and institution of Buddhism.
But it is strange when people claim that their container is less sectarian, and by implication superior, to other containers.

Mike
Not superior, just a broader accessibility and effectiveness. For example: I live in a town of approx. 50k in S. California that is very influenced by Hollywood culture...I like it here because it's quiet and small with great weather year round, but it is an extremely superficial town - style rules absolutely over substance. People are very externally-focused and materially-goaled. All of which makes it a fairly accurate if slightly magnified microcosm of the United States as a whole.

I don't mention anything about "Buddhism" here, because it wouldn't be well received. But I talk about the Dharma all the time, in plain English with no strange terminology or concepts. I describe Dharma (truth) in everyday conversation. For example: I apparently model a bit of calmness that causes people to take note of it and when they ask how I do it, I tell them that I make it a point to just sit quietly for a while each day so I can stop thinking so much...and then go on to discuss it in more depth if they're interested, not mentioning the words "meditation, concentration, contemplation, mind states, etc...". Some of these people have now taken to "sitting quietly for awhile" every day and gradually I've gotten around to discussing postures that help, all the funny things that we hear and think about when we just sit still, a few things we can do to make just sitting still a little more beneficial, etc.. As a result, I know a great many people here who love to discuss this and "life" with me - because I never say anything that spooks them out of their comfort zone. Nothing strange, nothing from "foreign" cultures, no difficult concepts and terms. No "spiritual" materialism.

Imo, the entirety of the teachings could be described this way, if we make the effort. People are quite receptive to The Truth. In my experience even complex aspects of the Dharma can be conveyed as long as it's described to them in ways that they can easily hear it that doesn't challenge many of the beams that hold up the structure they've carefully constructed that helps them get through life. So, I'm not evangelizing "Buddhism" but I am evangelizing Truth (The Dharma).
Last edited by pink_trike on Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:11 am, edited 2 times in total.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
Thaibebop
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 8:37 pm

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by Thaibebop »

pink_trike wrote:
Sanghamitta wrote:
pink_trike wrote:The Dharma stands on it's own just fine without the container and institution of Buddhism.
So you would prefer " Dhammaism " ? Its got to be called something. Just calling it the Dhamma, which is essentially what the Buddha did, has no resonance in our culture as it did in his. We cant just talk about " that thing we do " like we are members of the Cosa Nostra.. :smile: I think the attempt not to call Buddhism Buddhism is a bigger waste of energy than any possible danger of instutionalism. As to spreading it, I think example is both the most effective and the most challenging.
The OP asked about the most effective way to evangelize the Dharma. Imo, the most effective way to do this in our modern world would be to drop the "ism" and "ist" impulse that seems to bring many self-identified "Buddhists" comfort and structure. The term "Buddhist" has only very little resonance in our modern global society of 6.5 billion people and is of interest to only a very small number of people. For most folks in the world today it's in the same category as Mayan mysteries, Catholicism, tarot readings, and New Age visualization. Or it's regarded as an indulgence of a certain privileged class. Calling it Buddhist keeps the Dharma in a dark, hidden, archaic, cultural box that most people in modern society have no interest in. This box hides the Dharma under layers of institutionalism, jargon, cultural obfuscation, religiosity, and simulacra. If we're really interested in sharing the Dharma then peeling away the institution, obfuscation, jargon, religiosity, and simulacra is the most effective way. By living according to the teachings and practicing we begin to naturally model the Dharma in our daily life. We'll attract people who are attracted by the presence of the Dharma (truth) in our lives. We can then talk about the Dharma (truth) in ways that they can easily hear and assimilate into their own life...without the cultural froth and unnecessary simulacra.To reach the greatest number of people, it makes sense to speak about our _experience_ of the Dharma (truth) in their language within their cultural reference points, not in some secret society language of abstractification, religiosity, and mystification. The essence of the Truth found in the Buddhist container and institution is a pure wisdom and compassion that transcends all forms of culture, tradition, and language. It can be transfered to any cultural if the overgrowth is weed wacked away. However, this can't be done effectively if we cling to form and structure.

The key to awakening is that no matter how important something is, it must be thrown away. Siddhārtha Gautama didn't talk about "Buddhism", he talked about "The Truth"..."The Law"". It seems like we can do the same...we can simply talk about the experience of Truth. In my experience, this attracts people like ants to honey.
Good post! Yes, I singled out the Dhamma over Buddhism simply because the Dhamma is the Dhamma but Buddhism changes as you travel the world. One person's Buddhism isn't anothers. Like all religions there is politics attached to some forms of Buddhism as well. The teaching of the Buddha are of more interest to me.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings pink_trike,
pink_trike wrote:Not superior, just a broader effectiveness.
But if your everyday man doesn't know what it is, because it is being non-conceptual and nameless, how is that more broadly effective? It sounds more broadly vague and intangible to me.

The road from ignorance to wisdom is best travelled initially with conceptual understanding, i.e. Right View, which can in time be transcended in the form of Right Understanding. Right View is by definition, a view, a conceptual notion... and the first and most primary step on the Noble Eightfold Path.

It's all very well to be an exemplar of the Dhamma, but if people don't know what it is, and the Dhammic structures that the Buddha defined... what is your behaviour and your Dhamma pointing to?

Or maybe I'm missing your point slightly...

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
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by pink_trike »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings pink_trike,
pink_trike wrote:Not superior, just a broader effectiveness.
But if your everyday man doesn't know what it is, because it is being non-conceptual and nameless, how is that more broadly effective? It sounds more broadly vague and intangible to me.

The road from ignorance to wisdom is best travelled initially with conceptual understanding, i.e. Right View, which can in time be transcended in the form of Right Understanding. Right View is by definition, a view, a conceptual notion... and the first and most primary step on the Noble Eightfold Path.

It's all very well to be an exemplar of the Dhamma, but if people don't know what it is, and the Dhammic structures that the Buddha defined... what is your behaviour and your Dhamma pointing to?

Or maybe I'm missing your point slightly...

Metta,
Retro. :)
I'm curious to know what concepts found in "Buddhism" you think can't be described independent of buddhist jargon, the institution, the religious layer, and the simulacra. I'm not suggesting that I can do this but concepts aren't dependent on these things.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by Ben »

Hi Mike
mikenz66 wrote:
TheDhamma wrote:Hi
My thinking is that many Goenka retreat participants will learn of Buddhism later after the retreat (books and other sources) and see that there really is not much difference from Goenka's teachings and mainstream Buddhism (none really, just a matter of emphasis).
Actually, they learn a lot of Theravada Buddhism from his Retreat Dhamma talks. I personally found it first irritating, then merely amusing, that he claimed to not be teaching Buddhism. There's nothing I recall hearing in his Dhamma talks that would be out of place at any other Theravada retreat. Of course, it's difficult to find a balance in these matters.

Metta
Mike
I empathize with you. However, do remember that the ten-day course is really a ten-day introductory course! And the reluctance of Goenkaji to use the 'B' word is so that participants may focus on the teachings and practice which have universal application and not feel that there is a perceived barrier because of one's existing religious or spiritual affiliation.
Kind regards

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Pink_trike,
pink_trike wrote:I'm curious to know what concepts found in "Buddhism" you think can't be described independent of buddhist jargon, the institution, the religious layer, and the simulacra. I'm not suggesting that I can do this but concepts aren't dependent on these things.
I don't think the 4NT or 8NP can be simplified any further than they are, without foresaking any important aspect of them. If the Buddha could have made it more self-evident then he would have taught in such a way. As it is, the Buddha had to expound the Dhamma through the conceptual medium of language, and I trust that he did so in the best way possible, in his capacity as a Buddha.

Yes, he adapted his style and method to match the knowledge and disposition of his audience but it was always to guide them from A to B... and the B was the Buddhadhamma, in its standardised and oft-repeated structure. It wasn't as encouragement for them to "reinvent the wheel".

I do not buy into the Zen transmission myth regarding Maha-Kassapa and Buddha holding up a lotus. The Buddha always explicitly taught the Dhamma through concepts, and implicity taught it by living the Dhamma. Both were, and still are, important.

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
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by pink_trike »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Pink_trike,
pink_trike wrote:I'm curious to know what concepts found in "Buddhism" you think can't be described independent of buddhist jargon, the institution, the religious layer, and the simulacra. I'm not suggesting that I can do this but concepts aren't dependent on these things.
Both were, and still are, important.
)
Here we agree. We may differ as to which is more initially beneficial when introducing it to people who are unfamiliar with Buddhism and have no interest it in (evangelizing, which was the OP's focus).
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Pink_trike,
pink_trike wrote:Here we agree. We may differ as to which is more initially beneficial when introducing it to people who are unfamiliar with Buddhism and have no interest it in (evangelizing, which was the OP's focus).
There's standard Buddhist teachings that are appreciated even by such people though... the brahma-viharas come to mind, the notion of being able to :quote: let go :quote: of things that make us sad and angry etc.

All of which can of course be explained conceptually without recourse to the B word.

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
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Ben,
Ben wrote: I empathize with you. However, do remember that the ten-day course is really a ten-day introductory course! ...
Well, as far as I remember Goenka went though all of the Four Noble Truths, Dependent Origination, etc, and summarised the key ideas in more depth than I've seen on any single retreat with a Theravada monk. And there were plenty of Theravada chants. A couple of the participants in the course I was on (who were into Tao and Tai Chi) commented that they hadn't expected to have to sit through ten days of lectures on Buddhism. Hence my opinion that Goenka teaches a relatively standard, well run, Theravada retreat.

Getting back to the point, I do agree with Pink that there is value in presenting things in a way that is accessible and doesn't put people off. I think that can be very valuable.

Mike
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

With all due respect to Mr. Goenka, I think his chanting is a bit counter-productive in the sense that if he's trying to appeal to anyone and everyone, regardless of their religious denomination, introducing a "religious" element such as chanting, when the meditation techniques you're teaching are not inherently religious and don't require it, will be a cause of possible concern to atheists and theists alike. Even as a dedicated Theravadin Buddhist, I did not feel that this was useful in the observance of vedana, so wondered what productive outcome he hoped it would achieve? Perhaps one of his students might know. Ben?

I love that Mr. Goenka wants to praise the Buddha, I'm just a little worried about the time and place for such things and any conflict with his primary objective of having people across the world experience the benefits that come from vipassana meditation.

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
pink_trike
Posts: 1130
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:29 am
Contact:

Re: Spreading Buddhism

Post by pink_trike »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Pink_trike,
pink_trike wrote:I'm curious to know what concepts found in "Buddhism" you think can't be described independent of buddhist jargon, the institution, the religious layer, and the simulacra. I'm not suggesting that I can do this but concepts aren't dependent on these things.
1. I don't think the 4NT or 8NP can be simplified any further than they are, without foresaking any important aspect of them. If the Buddha could have made it more self-evident then he would have taught in such a way.


2. Yes, he adapted his style and method to match the knowledge and disposition of his audience but it was always to guide them from A to B... and the B was the Buddhadhamma, in its standardised and oft-repeated structure. It wasn't as encouragement for them to "reinvent the wheel".
1. Not simplified. Translated.

2. Not "reinvent". Restate.
Vision is Mind
Mind is Empty
Emptiness is Clear Light
Clear Light is Union
Union is Great Bliss

- Dawa Gyaltsen

---

Disclaimer: I'm a non-religious practitioner of Theravada, Mahayana/Vajrayana, and Tibetan Bon Dzogchen mind-training.
Post Reply