Post by zendancer on Jun 13, 2010 13:02:43 GMT -5
Loverofall: I agree with virtually everything you wrote with only a few minor caveats. In fact, I made many of the same points in my Christ-Consciousness book. You wrote: "Buddhism as a religion could focus more on serving others and Christianity could focus more on mental discipline." I wrote several paragraphs almost identical to this idea in both of my books.
In the "Pouring Concrete" book I also discussed this issue at some length. The cultures out of which all of the major religions arose were highly patriarchical, and there were deep fears about women and sex. The Buddha was afraid that sexual attraction would distract men and women seeking enlightenment, so he kept his followers segregated sexually. This same sort of thing is reflected in many branches of Christianity as well as many other religions. Men were in charge; they felt superior to women; they felt that women were like dangerous sirens and represented a threat to men's purity of purpose; etc. Today, we have male monasteries and female nunneries in many traditions, and in general, women are still considered secondary citizens throughout most of the religious world. All one has to do is look at the Taliban and their desire to prevent women from becoming educated to see the general fundamentalist outlook in action. The Catholic Church is still ruled by an exclusively male heirarchy and the same is true in Islam. It is even true in many of the major Christian denominations in America.
That is one aspect of the issue. Another related aspect is the self-denial self-punishment issue. A Buddhist Bodhisattva monk has to take hundreds of vows related to self-denial. They have to vow not to have sex, not to drink alcohol or do drugs, not to handle money, not to use after shave lotion or anti-perspirants, not to go to movies or entertainment activities, etc. Many Christian monks do the same sort of thing. It's all nonsense and has nothing to do with self-realization, but it comes from past practices and beliefs and all kinds of other crazy ideas about what it means to be spiritual.
I certainly don't feel any need to defend Buddhism (or any other religion for that matter), but in America it is a fact that Buddhism has moved very strongly into social action activities. Buddhist groups run hundreds of prison programs, food kitchens, social assistance programs, housing for the poor programs, etc. Bernie Glassman, a New York Zen Master, for example, is well known for running numerous outreach programs in that city. I personally know Buddhists who have donated vast amounts of money and time to social causes, so the monastic model of the Far East has certainly undergone some significant changes in the USA.
I have visited Buddhist monasteries in Japan and China where I have met some of the kindest and most loving people in the world, but those institutions are still sexually segregated and many of their vows and practices seem quaint or absurd from a more liberated perspective.
One of the reasons I lost interest in Zen was its rigidity in maintaining old Eastern practices and traditions and the emotional coldness of the general format. When I first encountered Gangaji, and her Advaita satsangs, I was impressed with the open expression of love that I witnessed, and the openess of that general approach to nonduality. As time went by, I lost all interest in institutionalized religions, but still appreciated why it appeals to so many people.
I think that today we are in the midst a major spiritual revolution because more and more people say that they are spiritual but not religious. The old structures of the church are no longer sufficiently satisfying and more and more people want to directly experience something that they intuit lies behind the religious facade.
The Shaolin monasteries and the Zen monasteries are enclaves of serious-minded folks, and they both have a tradition of only allowing people to enter who they think will share their seriousness of intent. This is not true of ordinary Buddhist temples and organizations. Many Zen monasteries have a formalized tradition of denying applicants admission for three days. Everyone knows that it's a kind of make-believe drama. Monks come out and try to run the applicants off, and the applicant has to keep returning to show how serious he is. Eventually, he is allowed inside, but this has nothing to do with the issue that Cabin raised in his post. If your car broke down in front of a Buddhist monastery, monks would come out and help you just as people would anywhere else. In general, people are pretty nice and very helpful throughout the world, whether they are self-realized or not. I've travelled all over the world and 99.9% of the people I've met on my trips have been kind, generous, and enjoyable to be with. I could write a book about all of the nice things that people have done for me in foreign countries as well as in America.
In Thailand and some other SE Asian countries, monks still go out and beg for food to eat. It's a 2500 year old tradition, but it has long since outlived its usefullness. I understand how the tradition got started, but if someone from Thailand asked me what I think should be done today, I'd say, "Tell the monks to go get a job and start being productive members of society!"
The wonderful thing about Buddhism, Advaita, and other world religions coming to America in the 20th century is that it may lead to an entirely new worldview concerning religious traditions. America is arguably the most materialistic country in the world, but in this generation materialism for many people is being looked at in a new and different way. Some Americans are realizing that the modern technological money-driven world is neither good nor bad, but has little to do with any of the deeper existential issues of human existence. Ramesh Balsekar was a bank president before he became an interpreter for Nisargadatta, and he became enlightened despite the fact that he was not a penniless sannyasin. A millionaire and a pauper can both wake up! In the same way, a married woman can wake up just as easily as a nun. The real issue is one's state of mind. Is one judgmental or non-judgmental? Does one live in the past and future or NOW? Is one lost in the mind or free of the mind? Does one see the world divided into "us" and "them," or does one see the unified field of being that underlies all apparent categories and separations?
I could write hundreds of pages more about this subject, but hopefully these few paragraphs capture the general flavor of the issue. Cheers.
In the "Pouring Concrete" book I also discussed this issue at some length. The cultures out of which all of the major religions arose were highly patriarchical, and there were deep fears about women and sex. The Buddha was afraid that sexual attraction would distract men and women seeking enlightenment, so he kept his followers segregated sexually. This same sort of thing is reflected in many branches of Christianity as well as many other religions. Men were in charge; they felt superior to women; they felt that women were like dangerous sirens and represented a threat to men's purity of purpose; etc. Today, we have male monasteries and female nunneries in many traditions, and in general, women are still considered secondary citizens throughout most of the religious world. All one has to do is look at the Taliban and their desire to prevent women from becoming educated to see the general fundamentalist outlook in action. The Catholic Church is still ruled by an exclusively male heirarchy and the same is true in Islam. It is even true in many of the major Christian denominations in America.
That is one aspect of the issue. Another related aspect is the self-denial self-punishment issue. A Buddhist Bodhisattva monk has to take hundreds of vows related to self-denial. They have to vow not to have sex, not to drink alcohol or do drugs, not to handle money, not to use after shave lotion or anti-perspirants, not to go to movies or entertainment activities, etc. Many Christian monks do the same sort of thing. It's all nonsense and has nothing to do with self-realization, but it comes from past practices and beliefs and all kinds of other crazy ideas about what it means to be spiritual.
I certainly don't feel any need to defend Buddhism (or any other religion for that matter), but in America it is a fact that Buddhism has moved very strongly into social action activities. Buddhist groups run hundreds of prison programs, food kitchens, social assistance programs, housing for the poor programs, etc. Bernie Glassman, a New York Zen Master, for example, is well known for running numerous outreach programs in that city. I personally know Buddhists who have donated vast amounts of money and time to social causes, so the monastic model of the Far East has certainly undergone some significant changes in the USA.
I have visited Buddhist monasteries in Japan and China where I have met some of the kindest and most loving people in the world, but those institutions are still sexually segregated and many of their vows and practices seem quaint or absurd from a more liberated perspective.
One of the reasons I lost interest in Zen was its rigidity in maintaining old Eastern practices and traditions and the emotional coldness of the general format. When I first encountered Gangaji, and her Advaita satsangs, I was impressed with the open expression of love that I witnessed, and the openess of that general approach to nonduality. As time went by, I lost all interest in institutionalized religions, but still appreciated why it appeals to so many people.
I think that today we are in the midst a major spiritual revolution because more and more people say that they are spiritual but not religious. The old structures of the church are no longer sufficiently satisfying and more and more people want to directly experience something that they intuit lies behind the religious facade.
The Shaolin monasteries and the Zen monasteries are enclaves of serious-minded folks, and they both have a tradition of only allowing people to enter who they think will share their seriousness of intent. This is not true of ordinary Buddhist temples and organizations. Many Zen monasteries have a formalized tradition of denying applicants admission for three days. Everyone knows that it's a kind of make-believe drama. Monks come out and try to run the applicants off, and the applicant has to keep returning to show how serious he is. Eventually, he is allowed inside, but this has nothing to do with the issue that Cabin raised in his post. If your car broke down in front of a Buddhist monastery, monks would come out and help you just as people would anywhere else. In general, people are pretty nice and very helpful throughout the world, whether they are self-realized or not. I've travelled all over the world and 99.9% of the people I've met on my trips have been kind, generous, and enjoyable to be with. I could write a book about all of the nice things that people have done for me in foreign countries as well as in America.
In Thailand and some other SE Asian countries, monks still go out and beg for food to eat. It's a 2500 year old tradition, but it has long since outlived its usefullness. I understand how the tradition got started, but if someone from Thailand asked me what I think should be done today, I'd say, "Tell the monks to go get a job and start being productive members of society!"
The wonderful thing about Buddhism, Advaita, and other world religions coming to America in the 20th century is that it may lead to an entirely new worldview concerning religious traditions. America is arguably the most materialistic country in the world, but in this generation materialism for many people is being looked at in a new and different way. Some Americans are realizing that the modern technological money-driven world is neither good nor bad, but has little to do with any of the deeper existential issues of human existence. Ramesh Balsekar was a bank president before he became an interpreter for Nisargadatta, and he became enlightened despite the fact that he was not a penniless sannyasin. A millionaire and a pauper can both wake up! In the same way, a married woman can wake up just as easily as a nun. The real issue is one's state of mind. Is one judgmental or non-judgmental? Does one live in the past and future or NOW? Is one lost in the mind or free of the mind? Does one see the world divided into "us" and "them," or does one see the unified field of being that underlies all apparent categories and separations?
I could write hundreds of pages more about this subject, but hopefully these few paragraphs capture the general flavor of the issue. Cheers.
